Arguments FOR and AGAINST AMS Higher Modern Studies

Lesson Starter In your own words, create a diagram/ summarise how the AMS system works.

What will I learn? About the voting system used in the Scottish Parliament. 3

Success Criteria Explain the advantages and disadvantages of the system. Assess the impact of the system 4

FOR PROPORTIONALITY – AMS produces a fairly proportional result but still maintains a clear link between the voters and their representatives. People have a constituency MSP who they can identify with and go to with their problems.

2. COALITION GOVERNMENT – can be effective government that is willing to listen to different perspectives. The Labour/Liberal Democrat coalition in the Scottish Parliament (1999-2007) introduced a number of policies that are dramatically different from the views of Labour controlled Westminster. For example, an end to tuition fees for Scottish university students. Note 2007,2011 result produced a minority and majority government.

3. WASTED VOTES – Votes are not wasted under AMS. Even if a party has no chance of winning a seat under the FPTP aspect, it can win party list seats as the Scottish Greens and Scottish Socialists have done. This may encourage more voters to participate.

4. BETTER REPRESENTATION – AMS allows a wider variety of views to be expressed. Under FPTP, the system is dominated by the two largest parties – Conservative and Labour. However, under AMS, smaller parties such as the Greens have gained representation. Glasgow region- 8 MSPs from a variety of different parties.

AGAINST 1. CHOICE OF CANDIDATES – As the party list aspect is used, some would argue that too much power is given to the party in choosing candidates. Often people like to know WHO they are voting for – personality and personal qualities are important in politics.

Example In the Scottish AMS, the voter has no say in the order a party ranks its prospective List MSPs. In most constituencies, being placed anything further down than 3rd or 4th in the party list means a candidate is highly unlikely to get elected. It is the political party that decides the order of the list. This explains why, in 2003, Margo MacDonald, an experienced and popular MSP resigned from the SNP and stood for election as an Independent candidate. Due to internal party squabbling, she was placed a lowly 6th on the SNP’s list for the Lothians region. This meant that, if she did not resign and run as an Independent, she would have had no realistic hope of being elected. She ran as an Independent and won. She won again in 2007 and 2011. But this is because she is a well known and popular personality in Edinburgh.

Had she been a “normal” candidate the party machine would, in all likelihood, have kept her out of politics.

In 2011, the SNP did not register its list candidates on the ballot paper at all. Instead it placed the slogan "Alex Salmond for First Minister" where its list candidate's details should go. This achieved the effect of boosting the SNP vote as Alex Salmond is the SNP's biggest name. This was clever politics! It broke no rules. However, some argue that ethically, parties should state who their List candidates really are. It is argued it is unfair to the voters, who are kept in the dark and who can end up with a  complete unknown as their List MSP.

2. CONFLICT – The system elects two types of representative – constituency MSPs and Regional MSPs. Ill feeling can result from one group claiming superiority over the other. For example, constituency MSPs may think they are more important because people elected them directly. Regional MSPs may believe they have a greater workload because they represent a larger area.

Example In August 2003, the then Labour MP Brian Wilson described list MSPs as “a waste of space”. There is an element of rivalry between constituency and List MSPs. Constituency MSPs tend to see themselves as the "real" MSP for the constituency. They, after all won the constituency election. It is perfectly possible to have a situation, such as in East Kilbride for several years, where Scottish Labour's Andy Kerr won the constituency seat of East Kilbride. But the defeated SNP candidate, Linda Fabiani was elected "through the back door" of the Party List election. In 2011 Linda Fabiani defeated Andy Kerr to become the constituency MSP for East Kilbride.

3. CONFUSION – The Scottish Parliament has constituency and regional MSPs. This may confuse people who may be unsure whom to contact if a problem arises. Also, people are put off voting because they do not understand the AMS.

4. EXTREMIST PARTIES – Some people are worried that extremist parties may have some representatives elected. This may provide them with a platform for their extremist views and allow them to secure even more support. The British National Party is a good example.

AMS and by-elections The regular by-elections of FPTP give the voter the chance to express a verdict on the performance of Government. Labour's loss of Glasgow East to the SNP in 2008 is a good example. With FPTP voters can punish an unpopular Government. It could be over handling of the economy, a foreign war, whatever. The voter gets a real chance to register a protest.

By contrast, if a List MSP resigns, there is no by-election. The party simply replaces him/her with some one else. You then have an “elected” representative that absolutely no-one voted for! A classic example occurred in 2005 with the "election" of Andrew Arbuckle MSP. Andrew Arbuckle “replaced” Keith Raffan as a List Scottish Liberal Democrat MSP for the region of Mid-Scotland and Fife in January 2005. Raffan resigned as an MSP due to ill health. Raffan had been the subject of an investigation by the Scottish Parliament into his travel expenses. Raffan claimed mileage for a return journey from Kirkcaldy to Edinburgh while on a visit to the Isle of Man. Under FPTP the voters may well have decided to punish the Scottish Liberal Democrats for having an MSP found to have pockled travel expenses. Perhaps not. But it would have been the voters' choice. Andrew Arbuckle, therefore, was a member of the Scottish Parliament who was never elected by the voters.