May 2015 could be the ‘lottery election’ – where your vote is worth about as much as a lottery ticket
British politics is now truly a multi-party phenomenon. The SNP could win over 50 seats, potentially overtaking the Liberal Democrats, while UKIP and the Greens together currently have the support of over a fifth of the UK population. The era of everyone voting for the two main parties is long gone.
But what happens when this is combined with a worn-out electoral system like First Past the Post?
The answer is: chaos. May 2015 could be what the Electoral Reform Society is calling a ‘lottery election’ – where your vote is worth about as much as a lottery ticket.
The ERS asked polling expert Professor John Curtice from the University of Strathclyde to look at some of the possible post-May scenarios: he found that it could all depend on relatively small swings of the vote affecting the whole outcome of the election.
Take one example. Despite the surge of the SNP to double-digit leads over Labour, small swings in the vote and its geographical spread mean they could either end up with a handful of seats or dozens (see graph). A neck-and-neck Labour/SNP result would leave the nationalists with fewer than 20 seats to Labour’s near-40, while a ten-point SNP lead would almost completely reverse that result.
When the Greens and UKIP are thrown into the mix, the result becomes even more unpredictable. What is likely, however, is that both parties will be disappointed, with UKIP potentially failing to build on their two by-election victories even with an expected 13 per cent of the national vote. At the same time the Greens – though likely to retain Brighton Pavilion – could fail to make any gains even with the 8 per cent they are currently polling.
Yet the Lib Dem vote could to some extent determine the election, with their support hitting the Conservatives harder than Labour. To illustrate this, a Lib Dem vote of 10 per cent would mean the Conservatives need a seven-point lead for a majority. But a Lib Dem result of 15 per cent would raise that to a full ten points (see graph).
That’s what happens when you try to squeeze six or seven-party politics into a two-party voting system. All the parties are affected by the lottery election one way or another, and while some may got lucky, others are going to be sorely disappointed.
Is this any way to determine the make-up of the next House of Commons? What can we do to make it fairer?
What we need above all is an electoral system that reflects how diverse British politics has become. One positive result of the May election might be that debates around electoral reform come back on the agenda. Perhaps we could even make 2015 the last lottery election.
Read ‘The Lottery Election’ here.
Josiah Mortimer works for the Electoral Reform Society
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
36 Responses to “Comment: Let’s make this the last ever ‘lottery election’”
AlanGiles
I agree with the gist of the article, but neither Labour or Conservative politicians would want to see an end of the status quo, simply because it is a pantomime where both take top billing in turns. Hapless Ed’s and Supersnob Tristram Hunt’s attacks on the Greens, though born of desperation shows they don’t want cooperation, even within their own party there are strong disagreements (Hodge last week for example when announcing she was withdrawing from the Mayoral contest took a pop at Christain Woolmar (“Who?” she said even though she has known him for years. The Tories of course are no better. If they can’t get on with each other they are not going to get on with outsiders.
And though they are supposed to despise each other, look how both sides try to protect each other with things like expenses and other aspects of their pampered lifestyles
Leon Wolfeson
And what the politicians think about their precious status quo is any reason not to campaign for PR?
Come off it.
Leon Wolfeson
I’d be more impressed if the ERS hadn’t campaigned for AV, which can be less fair at times than FPTP, amplifying swings.
We need PR, though, yes.
JAK
Leon, It was AV or FPTP. Because AV was rejected voting reform is now off the agenda, which is where the main two political parties want it, we’re now stuck with FPTP until their influence is severely diminished. AV would at least have been a foot in the door.
AlanGiles
I didn’t say that. I am merely stating the obvious – the two main parties will fight tooth and nail to prevent any changes to a system which profits both of them