Edexcel A-Level Politics 9PL0 · Paper 1 UK Politics · Content area 5 of 6

5. Electoral systems

5.1 first-past-the-post · 5.2 the other UK systems · 5.3 referendums as electoral events · 5.4 comparing and debating the systems.

← All areasPurple = thinker · Orange = example

Every bar below is a drop-down and starts closed. Click one to open it.

Progress

5.1 First-past-the-post Done

Essential The system used for general elections, and the one every other system is measured against. Learn how it works and its four headline effects: strong single-party government, disproportional results, safe seats and wasted votes.

The specification

5.1First-past-the-post and its effects

First-past-the-post is a plurality system: 650 single-member constituencies, one cross per voter, the candidate with the most votes wins. I can do this

It is used for House of Commons general elections, English local elections, and mayors and police and crime commissioners since 2024. I can do this

Its main effects are strong single-party government, disproportional results, safe seats, wasted votes and tactical voting. I can do this

Wording above follows the Pearson specification. Tick a line only when you could answer on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined

Directly: 2020 Q2b (the various electoral systems in use in the UK) sets first-past-the-post against the others.
As the framing: 2021 Q2a (the emergence of multiple parties under first-past-the-post) and 2022 Q1b (a named system, source) both turn on how the plurality rule works.

Pattern. First-past-the-post is the spine of the whole topic. Hold one set of dated figures showing how votes convert into seats, because every comparison essay leans on it.

What examiners reward and penalise

Stronger answers trade the gains against the costs - strong government bought at the price of disproportionality - rather than listing strengths then weaknesses.
Weaker answers claim first-past-the-post always produces a majority, ignoring that 2010 gave a coalition and 2017 a minority government held up by a confidence and supply deal.

One way to get high marks

Credited: the trade-off is the whole point - a plurality rule manufactures majorities and clear accountability, but at the cost of fairness to vote share.
Rewarded evidence: the 2024 result, where Labour won about a third of the vote but a Commons majority of 174, while a party on a far larger vote share won only a handful of seats.
Level 5 over Level 4: sustains a judgement on whether strong government is worth the disproportionality, instead of describing each effect in turn.

The 30-mark questions. Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging throws away a third of the marks. Examiners reward a clear and consistent line of argument: decide your view before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach a substantiated judgement. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows, and you should structure by theme rather than as a list of examples. On the Question 1 source question you must use the source - compare the two opposing views it contains and judge between them; ignoring the source caps the answer.

Open any past question linked above to read its full mark scheme and examiner report in the Question Bank.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Do the strengths of first-past-the-post outweigh its weaknesses?

Yes

Point. First-past-the-post usually produces strong, stable single-party government. Explanation. A manufactured majority lets a party carry out its manifesto and be clearly held to account at the next election. Example. The 2024 result handed Labour a working majority able to legislate without coalition partners. Evaluation. However, 2010 and 2017 show the system can no longer guarantee single-party rule, so this strength is weaker than it was.
Point. It keeps a strong link between an MP and a local seat. Explanation. Small single-member constituencies give every voter one clear, accessible representative to hold responsible. Example. Each of the 650 seats returns one MP with a defined local area and constituents. Evaluation. This is a real strength, though a safe-seat MP can take the constituency for granted.

No

Point. First-past-the-post produces disproportional results. Explanation. Seats won bear little relation to votes cast, so the Commons does not mirror how the country voted. Example. In 2024 Labour won a majority of 174 on about a third of the vote, while a party with a much larger vote share won very few seats. Evaluation. This is the central charge against the system, and it has grown sharper as more parties compete.
Point. Safe seats and wasted votes weaken voter choice. Explanation. In a safe seat the result is known in advance, so many votes change nothing and some voters back a second choice tactically. Example. Large numbers of seats rarely change hands between parties from one election to the next. Evaluation. This depresses turnout and engagement where the contest feels settled.

Best judgement. First-past-the-post still delivers strong government and a clear local link, but the disproportionality, safe seats and wasted votes are serious costs that grow as the party system fragments, so the case rests on how much value is placed on decisive government over fair representation.

Using it in essays

30-mark: any question on the effects of first-past-the-post (2021 Q2a, 2020 Q2b).
Topic sentence: "First-past-the-post buys strong, accountable government at the price of fairness, and the value of that bargain depends on which of the two matters more."
Final judgement: strong government is real but increasingly fragile, while the disproportionality is real and worsening.

Practise this on PantherElectoral systems detailed notes Electoral systems judgement grid

Wider context

Helpful context (background, not a spec requirement)

The simplest way to hold first-past-the-post together is to track one election from votes to seats: how much of the vote a party won, how many seats that gave it, and whether the result was a majority. That single trace exposes both the strength and the unfairness at once.

Examination priority

Important This is the foundation of the whole area. Lock in how the plurality rule works and one dated set of vote-to-seat figures you can reuse in every comparison.

5.2 The other UK systems Done

Essential The proportional and majoritarian systems used elsewhere in the UK: the Additional Member System in Scotland, Wales and London, the Single Transferable Vote in Northern Ireland, and the Supplementary Vote once used for mayors. Learn how each works and what it produces.

The specification

5.2Additional Member System, Single Transferable Vote and Supplementary Vote

The Additional Member System is a hybrid of first-past-the-post and a closed regional list, used for the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Senedd and the London Assembly. I can do this

The Single Transferable Vote uses multi-member seats and ranked voting, used for the Northern Ireland Assembly and Scottish council elections. I can do this

The Supplementary Vote was used for the Mayor of London and other mayors until the Elections Act 2022 moved them to first-past-the-post from 2024. I can do this

Wording above follows the Pearson specification. Tick a line only when you could answer on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined

Directly: 2026 Q2b (comparing first-past-the-post to the Additional Member System or the Single Transferable Vote) sits squarely here.
As the framing: 2020 Q2b (the various electoral systems in use in the UK) and 2022 Q1b (a named system, source) both reward detailed knowledge of how these systems work.

Pattern. The board likes a head-to-head between first-past-the-post and a proportional system. Prepare the Additional Member System and the Single Transferable Vote in enough detail to compare them directly on results, choice and government.

What examiners reward and penalise

Stronger answers explain what each system is designed to do - the Additional Member System tops up to correct disproportionality, the Single Transferable Vote shares multi-member seats - and judge the trade-offs.
Weaker answers muddle the systems together or describe the mechanics with no point about the effects on government and representation.

One way to get high marks

Credited: each system embodies a choice - the Additional Member System and the Single Transferable Vote buy proportionality and choice but tend to produce coalition or power-sharing government.
Rewarded evidence: coalition and minority government as the norm in Scotland and Wales under the Additional Member System, and power-sharing in Northern Ireland under the Single Transferable Vote.
Level 5: uses the contrast to judge what the UK would gain and lose by adopting one of these systems for general elections.

Open any past question linked above to read its full mark scheme and examiner report in the Question Bank.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Would a proportional system serve the UK better than first-past-the-post?

Yes

Point. Proportional systems make seats match votes far more closely. Explanation. Top-up seats under the Additional Member System and ranked multi-member voting under the Single Transferable Vote both bring chambers near to the overall vote share. Example. The Scottish Parliament under the Additional Member System reflects party support far more closely than the Commons does. Evaluation. However, fairer results come at the price of weaker single-party government, which some voters value more.
Point. They widen voter choice. Explanation. Two votes under the Additional Member System, or ranking under the Single Transferable Vote, let voters express more than a single preference. Example. The Single Transferable Vote lets a Northern Ireland voter rank candidates across and even within parties. Evaluation. This is a genuine gain, though more choice comes with a more complex ballot and count.

No

Point. Proportional systems tend to produce coalition or minority government. Explanation. When no party wins a majority of seats, policy is settled by post-election deals rather than by a manifesto voters endorsed. Example. Coalition and minority government has been the norm in Scotland and Wales under the Additional Member System. Evaluation. This weakens the clear accountability first-past-the-post provides.
Point. They complicate the ballot and weaken the local link. Explanation. Closed lists hand candidate order to party leaders, and large multi-member seats dilute the single-MP connection. Example. Under the Additional Member System a region returns both constituency and list members, creating two classes of representative. Evaluation. This is a real cost, though the link survives in a weaker form rather than vanishing.

Best judgement. A proportional system would deliver fairer results and wider choice, which the UK currently lacks, but it would trade away the strong single-party government and clean local link that first-past-the-post provides, so the answer depends on which of those goods is treated as more important.

Using it in essays

30-mark: compare first-past-the-post with the Additional Member System or the Single Transferable Vote (2026 Q2b).
Topic sentence: "The other UK systems show what first-past-the-post sacrifices, trading decisive government for fairer results and wider choice."
Final judgement: proportional systems are fairer and more open, but the gain in representation is paid for in weaker single-party government.

Practise this on PantherElectoral systems detailed notes Electoral systems quiz

Wider context

Helpful context (background, not a spec requirement)

A clean way to keep the three systems apart is to ask, for each one, what it is built to maximise: the Additional Member System balances a local link with proportionality, the Single Transferable Vote maximises voter choice and proportionality, and the Supplementary Vote produced a single winner with a broader mandate than a plain plurality.

Examination priority

Important Know the Additional Member System and the Single Transferable Vote well enough to compare each directly with first-past-the-post on results, choice and government. Hold the Supplementary Vote as the mayoral system that has now been replaced.

5.3 Referendums as electoral events Done

Important Referendums are the UK's main form of direct democracy, used since 1997 for big constitutional questions. This subsection is deliberately short: the full direct-democracy debate sits in Area 1, so here we treat referendums as events that decide questions outside the party system.

The specification

5.3The use and impact of referendums

Referendums let the people decide a single question directly, rather than through their elected representatives. I can do this

Since 1997 they have been used for devolution, the electoral system in 2011 and EU membership in 2016. I can do this

They sit alongside elections as a second route by which voters shape decisions, and their impact has often outlasted the result itself. I can do this

Wording above follows the Pearson specification. Tick a line only when you could answer on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined

Cross-reference: the referendum debate is examined mainly through Area 1 direct-democracy questions; here referendums matter as the events that decide constitutional questions outside party elections.
As evidence: 2020 Q2b (the systems in use in the UK) can draw on the 2011 referendum on the electoral system as the moment the country was asked to change first-past-the-post.

Pattern. Keep this short in an electoral-systems answer. Referendums are the link between this area and the direct-democracy debate in Area 1, so treat them as evidence and signpost back to that fuller argument.

What examiners reward and penalise

Stronger answers use referendums precisely - as the way the UK decides constitutional questions directly - rather than restating the whole direct-democracy debate inside an electoral-systems answer.
Weaker answers drift into a general account of referendums that belongs in Area 1 and loses focus on electoral systems.

One way to get high marks

Credited: referendums are a distinct electoral event, deciding one question directly, and the 2011 vote is the clearest case of the public being asked to change the voting system itself.
Rewarded evidence: the 1997 devolution referendums, the 2011 referendum on the electoral system, the 2014 Scottish independence referendum and the 2016 EU referendum.
Level 5: ties referendums back to the systems debate, for example using the 2011 result to explain why first-past-the-post survives.

Open any past question linked above to read its full mark scheme and examiner report in the Question Bank.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Are referendums a healthy addition to UK elections?

Yes

Point. Referendums settle big questions with direct popular consent. Explanation. Where a question cuts across party lines, a referendum lets the people decide it rather than leaving it to representatives alone. Example. The 2016 EU referendum settled a question Parliament had failed to resolve for years. Evaluation. However, a close result can leave a large minority unreconciled, so consent can be thinner than the headline suggests.
Point. They can raise engagement around the question asked. Explanation. A direct vote draws people into a debate they might otherwise ignore. Example. The 2014 Scottish independence referendum produced very high turnout and intense public debate. Evaluation. The effect is real but uneven, since turnout at the 2011 referendum on the voting system was low.

No

Point. Referendums can entrench division rather than resolve it. Explanation. A narrow result leaves a large losing side unconvinced, and the argument continues after the vote. Example. The 2016 result was followed by years of bitter dispute over what it meant. Evaluation. This is a powerful objection where the question is close and emotive.
Point. They sit awkwardly with parliamentary sovereignty. Explanation. A referendum result can clash with the judgement of elected representatives, leaving it unclear who decides. Example. Parliament spent years after 2016 reconciling the result with its own legislative role. Evaluation. This shows referendums complicate the system as well as adding consent to it.

Best judgement. Referendums add genuine direct consent on constitutional questions that elections cannot easily settle, but they work poorly for close and emotive issues and sit uneasily with parliamentary sovereignty, so they are a useful addition only when used sparingly and for the right kind of question.

Using it in essays

30-mark: the full referendum judgement belongs in Area 1; here use referendums as evidence inside electoral-systems answers.
Topic sentence: "Referendums are the UK's main direct-democracy event, and the 2011 vote is the moment the public was asked to keep or change the voting system."
Final judgement: a useful supplement to elections for constitutional questions, but not a replacement for them.

Practise this on PantherReferendums walk-through Electoral systems judgement grid

Wider context

Helpful context (background, not a spec requirement)

The neatest link between this area and Area 1 is the 2011 referendum on the electoral system: it was both a direct-democracy event and a vote on first-past-the-post itself, so it belongs in both debates and connects them.

Examination priority

Important Keep this brief. Learn the dated referendums as evidence and signpost the full argument to Area 1 rather than rehearsing it here.

5.4 Comparing and debating the systems Done

Essential The headline debate: should the UK replace first-past-the-post for general elections? This is where every strand of the area comes together, including the 2011 referendum, when voters were asked to change the system and said no by a wide margin.

The specification

5.4Comparing the systems and the case for reform

The debate weighs first-past-the-post against proportional and majoritarian alternatives on results, government, choice and the local link. I can do this

In 2011 a referendum asked whether to replace first-past-the-post with the Alternative Vote for general elections. I can do this

The Alternative Vote was rejected, with about 68 per cent voting No, so first-past-the-post remains in place for Westminster. I can do this

Wording above follows the Pearson specification. Tick a line only when you could answer on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined

Directly: 2026 Q2b (comparing first-past-the-post to the Additional Member System or the Single Transferable Vote) and 2019 Q1b (proportional representation should be used for general elections, source).
Related: 2020 Q2b (the various systems in use) and 2021 Q2a (multiple parties under first-past-the-post) both feed the reform argument.

Pattern. Whether to replace first-past-the-post is a recurring 30-mark question. Prepare one judgement that weighs fairer representation against strong, accountable government, and use the 2011 result as evidence.

What examiners reward and penalise

Stronger answers compare the systems against a clear test - results, government, choice and the local link - and reach a verdict on reform rather than describing each system in turn.
Weaker answers assume proportional representation is obviously fairer and forget the cost in weaker single-party government, or ignore that voters rejected change in 2011.

One way to get high marks

Credited: the choice is a genuine trade-off - reform buys fairer results and wider choice but tends to cost decisive single-party government.
Rewarded evidence: the 2011 referendum, in which the Alternative Vote was rejected with about 68 per cent voting No, the 2024 disproportionality, and coalition government in Scotland and Wales.
Level 5: reaches and sustains a defensible verdict on whether the UK should replace first-past-the-post, weighing both goods explicitly.

Open any past question linked above to read its full mark scheme and examiner report in the Question Bank.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Should the UK replace first-past-the-post for general elections?

Yes

Point. A proportional system would end the disproportionality of first-past-the-post. Explanation. Seats would match votes far more closely, so the Commons would mirror how the country voted. Example. In 2024 a Commons majority of 174 rested on about a third of the vote, a gap a proportional system would close. Evaluation. However, fairer results would come at the cost of the strong single-party government first-past-the-post usually delivers.
Point. Reform would reduce safe seats and wasted votes. Explanation. Under a more proportional system far fewer votes would be wasted, and fewer seats would be safe, which could raise engagement. Example. The Additional Member System and the Single Transferable Vote both leave far fewer wasted votes than first-past-the-post. Evaluation. This is a real gain, though more complex ballots and counts are the price.

No

Point. First-past-the-post usually delivers strong, accountable single-party government. Explanation. A single party can carry out its manifesto and be clearly judged for it, which coalitions blur. Example. The 2024 election produced a clear single-party government able to legislate. Evaluation. This is the strongest case for keeping the system, though 2010 and 2017 show it can no longer guarantee a majority.
Point. Voters already rejected reform when asked. Explanation. A referendum gave the public a direct choice to change the system and they declined it. Example. The 2011 referendum rejected the Alternative Vote, with about 68 per cent voting No. Evaluation. This weakens the case for change on consent grounds, though that vote was on one alternative rather than proportional representation in general.

Best judgement. The case for replacing first-past-the-post rests on fairer results and fewer wasted votes, which are real democratic gains, but it must overcome the loss of strong single-party government and a public that rejected change in 2011, so reform is justified only if fairness is placed clearly above decisive government.

Using it in essays

30-mark: should first-past-the-post be replaced for general elections (2019 Q1b, 2026 Q2b).
Topic sentence: "The case for replacing first-past-the-post turns on whether fairer representation matters more than the strong, accountable government it delivers."
Final judgement: a defensible verdict either way, anchored in the 2011 rejection and the 2024 disproportionality as evidence.

Practise this on PantherElectoral systems judgement grid Electoral systems detailed notes

Wider context

Helpful context (background, not a spec requirement)

A useful way to settle the reform debate is to decide in advance which good ranks highest - fair results, strong government, wide choice or a clear local link - because no system maximises all four, and naming the priority is what produces a sustained judgement.

Examination priority

Important This is a banker 30-mark question. Lock in a clear line on reform, the 2011 result as evidence, and one trade-off you can argue either way.

Test Section test - 12 questions

Twelve mixed questions covering the whole area. Your most recent score shows in the top bar.

Practise this topic on Panther

Notes Detailed notes Judgement grid Flashcards Quiz

← Political parties Voting behaviour and the media →