1. The advantages of having a President are that they would be accountable to a public vote, and that elections would force a regular change of leader. However, the Queen is traditional and part of the fabric of our nation. Her powers are limited in a way that would be hard to maintain if there were an elected president, therefore centralising power at the top of government.
2. Elected Lords are accountable and relatively easy to remove, but are subject to their constituents rather than their own convictions. -Appointing Lords puts a lot of power in the hands of those who make the appointments, but it is argued that these people can be experts in the selection process. –Sourcing Lords from trades and professional groups makes the second chamber more representative, and removes party control, but in effect would mean interest groups running part of government. It has been tried in Hong Kong with mixed success. –Abolishing the Lords would save taxpayers money, but leave the House of Commons almost entirely unchecked in their power.
3. Fixed term parliaments would remove the power of the Prime Minister to call an election when it suits him politically, but would reduce the flexibility needed to avoid holding elections during a crisis.
4. Taxpayers would foot the bill of party spending, but this would avoid the risk of donors trying to buy political influence with parties.
5. Limiting spending would increase the ability of small parties and independents to compete, but could result in giving these groups a disproportionate say nationally.
6. Strengthening local government would put power closer to the people, letting them have a greater say in how their local area is run. However, this can result in ‘post-code lotteries’ where services are not available everywhere.
7. Fewer MP’s would save the taxpayer money. However, MP’s already have a huge number of constituents to represent.
8. A Bill of Rights would clarify human rights law, and form a single document with which our country could identify. The argument against this is that all of our rights are already provided by law, and that such a document is unnecessary.
9. Compulsory voting is used in many countries, with the obvious advantage of increasing turnout. However, it is then necessary to have a box to register disapproval of all candidates, which could be a considerable percentage of responses.
10. Many people say that the majority of 16 year olds are too young to vote maturely. However, they pay taxes, receive benefits, raise children and can sign up for the armed forces.
11. Internet voting could be as secure as internet banking, though many fear that it is open to fraud or computer errors after recent data security breaches.
12. While most would agree that a rogue MP should be able to be removed by constituents, the difficulty is that the percentage required to do so would have to be high enough to prevent opposition parties clubbing together to remove an honourable candidate.
13. Referendums put power in the hands of the people over key issues, but can be structured to give governments justification in enacting extreme or unwise things. Some argue politics should be kept in the hands of our dedicated representatives, and hold them accountable at the end of a term.
14. There are 3 main systems of counting votes for electing politicians; First Past the Post – The current method. Candidates stand for a single constituency, and are elected by a majority of votes cast. This creates majority governments more often, but leaves small parties under-represented. Proportional Representation: Possibly the most well known alternative. Seats are distributed amongst the parties according to their regional or national share. While this is much more representative, candidates are selected by their national party and lose the connection to their constituency. AV+ : In the Alternative Vote+, most MPs are still elected for 1 constituency, but there are around a 1/5th that are elected as a “top-up”, which gives smaller parties a fairer representation nationally.