Advantages and disadvantages of First Past the Post voting

Close MP-constituency relationship: One representative is elected for each constituency and this usually means there will be a strong constituency-MP relationship. It also means that if voters do not like their MP they can also vote to get rid of an individual person.
One party strong government: Usually one party wins the election which means the winning party gets five years to put its plans (given in its manifesto) into action. In 2019 it was the Conservative Party who won the General Election.
Simplicity: The FPTP system is easily understood and familiar. Voters were given the chance a few years ago to get rid of FPTP for UK parliament elections but they choose to keep it.

Minority of the vote: In most constituencies more people (in total) vote against the winning candidate than for them. Sometimes an MP can be elected on a vote as low as only 35%, a minority, of the vote. The winning party is also usually elected by less than 50% of the voters. This happened in 2019 as the Conservatives only won 43.6% of the vote.

Parties do not always gain fair representation: In 2015, UKIP polled 12.6% of the vote but returned only 1 MP. In 2019, Labour received 18% of the vote in Scotland but only returned 1 MP. However, the Liberal Democrats received 9.5% of the vote and returned 4 MPs.
Tactical voting: It is argued that FPTP encourages tactical voting (or people not bothering to vote) as they think their vote will have little chance of helping elect their candidate. For example, in a constituency or seat that usually returns a Conservative MP (sometimes called a ‘safe’ seat), there is little point in a voter choosing Labour as they are unlikely to have their candidate elected. Where this happens, and it happens in many constituencies, people may vote not for a candidate they prefer but against a candidate they dislike. Two-thirds of constituencies in the UK are described as safe seats.

��ý