The single transeferable vote is more reprsentative than FPTP. This is proven through the evidence of the widened choice of candidates, the number of seats equalling the number of votes, everyone getting their views represented, mps needing to win their seats on merit and the form of coalition.
Firstly stv is more representative than fptp as more choice is given to the voters as they get to choose a list of candidates in order of preference by marking their first choice by placing a “1” next to the candidates name, a “2” for their second preference and so on. This means that if a voters first preference candidate does not win their vote is transferred on to their next preference and so on until the required number of seats are filled. With Stv the voter has more choice as they choose between candidates as well as for different parties. For example a voter wishing for more woman mps, might vote for a woman MP from their own party and then all the other woman candidates from which ever partys they represent.
Again stv shows that it is more representative than fptp as in fptp it does not a produce a proportional result this means that the percentage of votes received does not compare with the percentage of seats gained. This is unfair and means that the winners are over represented. In the 2005 general election Labour gained 65 percent of the seats with only thirty five percent of the votes. For stv the number of seats more accurately represents the number of votes, therefore only a party or coalition of parties which can attract more than fifty percent of the electorate can form government.
A third example of evidence that stv is more representative is that everyone’s views are represented in one way or another another, due to this system there is less wasted votes due to the fact that if the voters first preference does not need their vote then as said previous the vote is transferred to their second preference and so on. In this way most votes help to elect a candidate, most voters can identify a representative that they personally helped to elect, such a personal link increases accountability. It is evident in this way that stv is more representative that fptp as in using fptp 1997 14.7 million voters cast ineffective votes that is 42.8 percent that voted. with stv this figure is significantly decreased.
On the other hand stv breaks the fptp link between an individual representative and voter. In fptp…