Navigating the Binary System: Examining the Influence of Westminster’s Architecture, First Past The Post and the Media on UK Politics
The British political landscape is characterised by the dominance of two main parties, the Conservatives and Labour. They are best known for slugging it out in the Westminster Chamber, like bare-knuckled prize-fighters, pumped up by an electoral system which gives them a distinct weight advantage.
Coupled with the influence of (largely foreign-controlled) politically-slanted media, this spectacle raises concerns about the fairness and integrity of the democratic process.
As calls for reform grow louder, it becomes imperative to explore alternative approaches that promote inclusivity, collaborative governance, and a diverse media landscape.
The Challenges of a Confrontational Political Battlefield
Conservatives vs Labour, that is how most British people see our political system. These two parties always seem to be pitted against each other. Indeed, in the UK Parliament, the parties literally sit opposite, eye-balling each other. This seating configuration was designed for conflict and emerged as a result of the rivalries between the two informal groups that advised the Kings of England over 800 years ago. It was set up to deliver only one-party majorities.
Yet in many other nations, this is not the case. A more common design is a semi-circular shaped parliamentary chamber which lends itself to less heated debates.
When the Chamber was destroyed in WW2, Churchill demanded its reconstruction with the same layout, as he believed the structure and layout is what formed the two-party system, saying 'we shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us'.
This hyper-competitive, alienating and occasionally coarse environment sets the stage for governments that seek no compromises or alliances. Yet despite needing an overhaul, parliament is unlikely to change. No reforms are in the pipeline and the agonistic manners of British politics - shouting, jeering and heckling during debates - have mined the political battlefield.
Unveiling the Inequities of the UK Electoral System
The results of the "First Past the Post" voting system play straight into this Punch and Judy sketch. FPTP artificially inflates support for the larger parties. For instance in 2019, in Scotland, the Scottish National Party only required 26,000 votes for a seat in parliament, compared to the Green Party's nearly 800,000 nationally. At the same time Labour needed roughly 12,000 more votes than the Conservatives to win a seat and the Liberal Democrats far more than that. With barely 43% of the vote, this approach permitted parties like the Conservatives in 2019 (and Labour in 1997, 2001 and 2005) to win undeserved and divisive thumping majorities.
FPTP gives a particularly strong advantage to the Conservatives because multiple progressive parties split the anti-Conservative vote. Normally for every right wing candidate who stands in a General Election, there will be three candidates from the centre, centre left and left ( Greens, Labour and Liberal Democrats).
Historical evidence reveals that most single-party majoritarian administrations since 1935 have not received a majority of votes. As was shown in the 2019 General Election, where Green Party, Liberal Democrat, and Brexit Party voters won 16% of the vote, but only managed to win 2% of the seats, this lack of proportionality hinders political variety. Given that the relationship between votes and seats is tenuous at best, and often completely out of kilter, this disparity in representation raises questions about the fairness of the UK’s electoral system.
Shaping Public Opinion and Political Outcomes Through the Press
The press, including printed newspapers, traditional news media, and recently social media, have all had a huge impact on public opinion and political results, which is important for influencing elections and British democracy.
One prominent example is the 1992 General Election, where the Conservative Party, led by John Major, achieved an unexpected victory despite psephological predictions favouring the Labour Party. With the title "It's The Sun Wot Won It," The Sun newspaper made a name for itself by claiming victory for the Conservative party. Yet, in the following election the traditionally right-leaning Sun surprisingly backed the Labour Party.
Tony Blair, the Leader of the Labour Party, was able to establish positive relationships with some of the right wing newspapers, which played a significant role in influencing public opinion in favour of Labour, demonstrating the role of the media in swaying public opinion.
In British politics, this partisan alignment between some media and political parties has frequently occurred. The influence of the media on elections was also shown during the 2016 Brexit vote, as publications with bigger readerships, such the Daily Mail, Telegraph, Express, and Star, tended to back the Leave side. Their output influenced public conversation and may have had an impact on voters' choices.
Concerns also persist regarding media biases, and the tendency to polarise debates, particularly on contentious issues like immigration. Publications sensationalise topics, trivialise political arguments, and divide the population. This trend hinders a balanced and informed democratic process, potentially distorting the views of the electorate.
Furthermore, without disregarding the decline in newspaper sales, the print media have retained some of their influence over the media agenda. As discussed by Roy Greenslade, online news sources and social media platforms often respond to an agenda set by national newspapers. As the drive for political reform gains momentum, it becomes crucial to address the impact of media influence and promote a more inclusive and balanced democratic system.
Conclusion: Towards a better democracy
To conclude,the prevailing confrontational and binary nature of British politics, reinforced by the physical design of Westminster’s celebrated chamber, the First-past-the-post electoral system and media biases, challenges the ideals of fairness and inclusivity in the democratic process.
The entrenched divisions between the Conservatives and Labour impedes collaboration and stifles opportunities for meaningful reform. The disproportionate advantages enjoyed by larger parties within the electoral system marginalises smaller parties, limiting political variety and representation. The influential role of media endorsement and biases amplifies this binary system, potentially distorting public opinion and undermining informed democratic discourse.
In light of these concerns, it is imperative to re-evaluate and modernise British political infrastructure to foster a more equitable and representative democracy. This requires exploring alternative electoral systems, promoting cross-party alliances, encouraging a diverse and responsible media environment and re-designing the chamber, should the restoration of the Palace of Westminster ever proceed.
By addressing these challenges, the British political system can aspire to better reflect the interests and aspirations of its citizens, ensuring a more vibrant and participatory democracy in the future.
Marie-Alix Depuydt, Student at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, doing an internship at Unlock Democracy.