AMS

Question 1

The Additional Member System (AMS) is used for

Answer 1

Welsh Assembly, Scottish Parliament and the Greater London Assembly elections.

Question 2

Additional Member System is used for

Answer 2

the Scottish and Welsh devolved governments

Question 3

How does AMS work?

Answer 3

Electors have two votes: one for a representative (for a constituency), one for a party (for a region)

Question 4

Who is the winner for constinuency and who for party list?

Answer 4

The winner for each constituency is the candidate with the most number of votes
For the regional votes, divide the number of votes they got by the (number of constituencies won+1)Party with the highest number wins the seat. For the rest of the seats, repeat this action but add any additional seats won

Question 5

AMS is a ———system why?

Answer 5

hybrid Mixes FPTP (constituency seats) with Party List (regional seats) for better proportionality.

Question 6

Why is it more proportional than FPTP?

Answer 6

he second vote corrects FPTP’s bias, allocating extra regional seats (using methods like d’Hondt) to match overall party support, ensuring fairer outcomes.

Question 7

Advantages AMS

Answer 7

More proportional-Produces more accurate reflection of overall votes than FPTP.- results very proportional- but not perfect
Better Representation: Allows smaller parties to gain seats, increasing diversity- Smaller parties do better, provided they have a certain level of support in a particular region (usually around 10%) otherwise they don’t.
Maintains Accountability: Keeps local constituency representatives (FPTP element).
Coalition Potential: Encourages multi-party governments, sharing power.
Voter Choice: Voters can support different parties with their two votes (split-ticket).
Less idea of wasted votes

Question 8

Disadvantages (Arguments Against)

Answer 8

Complexity: Can confuse voters (split-ticket voting).
Undemocratic Lists: PR seats filled by party-selected lists, not direct voter choice, top up candidates unfair- less worj and no accountability - Creates two types of MP- giving them a different status
Coalition Instability: Can lead to weaker, unstable coalition governments.
Complicated counting- slow down election results

Extremists- makes it easier for them to gain power
Instability/changes - The fixed % may not always be high enough to keep out extremists

Question 9

How is Scotland 2011 an example of how results in AMS are not always proportional?

Answer 9

The 2011 Scottish Parliament election demonstrated a lack of proportionality in the Additional Member System (AMS) because the Scottish National Party (SNP) won an overall majority of seats (69 out of 129) with a considerably smaller share of the overall vote.
Seat vs. Vote Share: The SNP secured around 45% of the constituency vote and 44% of the regional list vote, but this translated into 53% of the total seats in Parliament, giving them an outright majority. This contrasts with a perfectly proportional system where a party with 44-45% of the vote would expect to win a similar percentage of seats, likely resulting in a minority or coalition government.