Report Launch: What Could Future Electoral Systems Look Like?

June 9, 2026

Blogs, Campaign updates, Latest news

Report Launch: What Could Future Electoral Systems Look Like?

Over the past few hundred years, our society and democracy have developed and changed beyond recognition. However, our voting system has failed to keep pace. We believe that First Past the Post has no place in a modern democracy, and should be replaced by a system of Proportional Representation. If you agree, sign the petition. If you want to know why, read on:

Minority rule

The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it's the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we've had single-party 'majority' governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn't vote for and don't agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.

Proportional Representation means majority rule, not minority rule. With PR, any government must have a majority of votes behind it - so in order to govern, a party needs to either work collaboratively with other parties, or persuade most of us to vote for it.

Demand Real Democracy

The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.

Blog by Emma Harrison, CEO of Make Votes Matter.

This week, Make Votes Matter published a new report examining the electoral systems that could replace First Past the Post (FPTP). While discussions about voting systems can sometimes seem technical, they raise a fundamental question about the health of our democracy: does Britain’s electoral system still reflect the way people vote?

As our politics becomes increasingly multi-party, the flaws in First Past the Post are becoming harder to ignore. A voting system designed for a different political era is producing increasingly distorted results, leaving millions of voters feeling that their voices do not count.

That is why the debate about electoral reform is changing. The long-standing claim that First Past the Post guarantees stability is becoming increasingly difficult to defend. Britain’s politics is more fragmented than at any point in recent history, and support for Proportional Representation continues to grow across political parties, civil society organisations and the wider public.

The question is no longer whether the current system has problems. Increasingly, it is what should replace it.

We launched our report with the support of keynote speakers Lord Mark Pack, Liberal Democrat Peer and polling expert, and Professor Maria Iacovou, Professor of Quantitative Sociology and a member of the Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform.

Lord Pack highlighted the scale of disproportionality seen in recent local elections and reminded us that proportional voting systems are already successfully used across parts of the UK. Professor Iacovou reflected on Labour’s evolving relationship with electoral reform and expressed disappointment that a commitment to changing the voting system did not make it into the party’s most recent manifesto.

Click here to read the report.

What makes a good electoral system?

Our report builds on the Good Systems Agreement, which sets out ten principles for evaluating electoral systems:

Proportionality
Representation
Equal value of votes
Local links
Diversity
Voter choice
Accountability
Stability and flexibility
Sustainability and adaptability
Simplicity for voters

Using these principles, we assessed the electoral systems most commonly discussed as alternatives to First Past the Post:

Single Transferable Vote (STV)
Regional List Proportional Representation
Mixed Systems (such as the Additional Member System and Mixed Member Proportional)
Alternative Vote Plus (AV+)

What did we find?

The headline conclusion is straightforward: almost any well-designed proportional system would be a significant improvement on First Past the Post.

However, not all proportional systems perform equally well against the principles of a good electoral system. Different systems make different trade-offs between proportionality, voter choice, accountability, local representation and diversity.

Single Transferable Vote (STV)

STV allows voters to rank candidates in multi-member constituencies. It offers the highest level of voter choice and gives voters influence not only over which party is elected, but also which individual candidates represent them.

The report highlights STV’s strengths in accountability, local representation and voter empowerment. Voters can choose between candidates from different parties, or between candidates from the same party.

To maximise proportionality, the report recommends constituencies electing between four and six MPs, with five as the preferred average.

Regional List PR

Regional List systems allocate seats proportionally across larger constituencies. They can deliver highly proportional outcomes and often support greater gender and demographic diversity among elected representatives.

The report is particularly supportive of flexible or open-list versions of the system, which allow voters to influence which candidates are elected. By contrast, closed lists place too much power in the hands of political parties.

The report recommends constituencies electing between five and eight MPs, with six as the preferred average.

Mixed Systems

Mixed systems combine constituency MPs with additional “top-up” representatives elected proportionally.

These systems have the advantage of preserving constituency representation and are already familiar to voters in Scotland and Wales. However, the report notes that their success depends heavily on design. If too few proportional seats are available, significant distortions can remain.

Alternative Vote Plus

Alternative Vote Plus is included because of its historical connection to the Jenkins Commission and previous UK electoral reform debates. While it would likely improve upon First Past the Post, the report concludes that it remains largely untested and would probably deliver weaker proportionality than other available options.

The bigger picture

The report does not formally endorse a single electoral system. Instead, it concludes that any replacement for First Past the Post should balance proportionality, voter choice, accountability, local representation and diversity. Ultimately, however, we believe that the best way forward is the establishment of a National Commission on Electoral Reform to design and implement a proportional voting system for Westminster.

Britain needs a voting system fit for the future

Britain’s politics has changed dramatically. Our electoral system has not.

The increasingly plural nature of British politics means that First Past the Post is producing outcomes that are less representative, less trusted and less capable of reflecting how people actually vote.

Our report shows that Proportional Representation is not a single model but a family of systems capable of delivering fairer results, stronger representation and a healthier democracy. The challenge now is not whether change is possible, but how we achieve it.

A fair voting system is within reach. With enough public pressure and political leadership, Proportional Representation could become a reality before the next general election.

The question is no longer whether Britain has outgrown First Past the Post. The question is what comes next.

Blogs, Campaign updates, Latest news

Report Launch: What Could Future Electoral Systems Look Like?

Minority rule

Similar articles

Why Make Votes Matter is proud to support Better!

Our message to Andy Burnham: Make electoral reform a priority

“You’re joking – not another one!” Why First Past the Post is to blame for Britain’s political chaos.

Does the voting system influence attitudes towards elections? Lessons from Denmark.

Frustration in Makerfield at a system no longer fit for purpose

Do the Local Elections Strengthen the case for Electoral Reform? APPG for Fair Elections event with Sir John Curtice