The single transferable vote (STV) is a proportional representation voting system used in several elections across the UK, particularly in Northern Ireland, Scottish local elections, and for certain other bodies like university senates. Unlike the traditional ‘first-past-the-post’ system, where the candidate with the most votes wins, STV is designed to more accurately reflect the preferences of voters and ensure that election results represent a broader spectrum of public opinion.
How does the Single Transferable Vote system work?
Under the STV system, voters rank candidates in order of preference rather than choosing just one. Here’s how it works in practice:
Ranking candidates: Voters are given a ballot paper with a list of candidates. Instead of marking a single ‘X’ next to one candidate, voters rank the candidates by placing a ‘1’ next to their first preference, a ‘2’ next to their second preference, and so on. Voters can rank as many or as few candidates as they wish.
Quota calculation: To win a seat, a candidate must achieve a specific number of votes, known as the quota. This ensures that the number of votes required to win a seat is proportionate to the total votes cast and the number of seats available.
Counting votes: The first preference votes are counted first. If a candidate reaches the quota, they are elected. If they receive more votes than needed, the surplus votes are transferred to the remaining candidates based on the voters’ next preferences. In the event that no candidate meets the quota, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed according to the voters’ next preferences. This process continues until all seats are filled.
Advantages of the STV system
Proportional representation: One of the primary advantages of STV is that it leads to more proportional outcomes. Since votes can be transferred, even smaller parties and independent candidates have a better chance of winning seats, reflecting the diversity of political opinions in the electorate.
Minimizes wasted votes: In STV, fewer votes are wasted. Even if a voter’s first choice doesn’t win, their vote can still help elect their second or third choice, ensuring that most voters feel their vote has had an impact.
Reduces tactical voting: Because voters can rank candidates rather than choosing just one, there is less incentive for tactical voting (voting for a candidate not because they are your preferred choice, but because they are more likely to win). Voters can honestly rank candidates in their order of preference without fear of ‘wasting’ their vote.
Encourages broad-based campaigning: Candidates under STV are motivated to appeal to a wider audience, including those who might rank them as their second or third choice, rather than just their core supporters.
More Like This: First Past the Post (FPTP) voting system
Disadvantages of the STV system
Complexity: The STV system is more complex to understand and administer than simpler systems like first-past-the-post. This can lead to confusion among voters, especially those unfamiliar with ranking candidates.
Longer counting process: Because of the need to transfer surplus votes and eliminate candidates in multiple rounds, the counting process in STV elections can be lengthy and resource-intensive, sometimes delaying the final result.
Potential for exhausted votes: If a voter does not rank enough candidates and all their preferences are eliminated, their vote becomes ‘exhausted’ and no longer contributes to the outcome. This can happen more frequently in elections with many candidates, potentially leading to a less proportional result.
Mixed accountability: In multi-member constituencies, it can be harder for voters to hold individual representatives accountable since multiple representatives are elected to serve the same area.
Follow us on Twitter @BeInTheKnow_UK
