Why single-party governments under First Past the Post fail to get things done

For all the talk of “strong government,” the reality of single-party rule under First Past the Post (FPTP) often looks anything but. Behind the scenes, these governments can be paralysed by internal battles, faction against faction, each fighting not for the public’s priorities, but for control of the party machine.

We’ve seen it time and again. When one party holds most of the seats on less than half the votes, the supposed “majority” is fragile from the start. The real fights aren’t across the floor of the Commons, but inside the ruling party itself. It may look stable on paper, but inside it’s a house divided.

As we saw in the dying years of the last government, from leadership coups to reshuffle dramas, the energy that should go into governing too often gets burned up in managing factions. And because the system locks out alternative voices, these internal battles become the only outlet for political debate. Policy ends up shaped not by what the country wants, but by who’s winning inside the party.

A fragile “Majority”

It’s the rotten core of Westminster’s system: one party can dominate Parliament with barely a third of the national vote. That’s what happened in 2024, and it can happen again.

That doesn’t build strength, it builds tension. A party elected on a minority of votes has to constantly adjust to try and maintain the coalition that elected it, but each movement alienates one side. The result is a fragile coalition disguised as a single party, without the openness or accountability of a genuine coalition government.

When that coalition starts to splinter, there’s no transparent process for compromise. The public sees confusion and delay, not negotiation and resolution.

Popularity doesn’t equal power

Under First Past the Post, the power of a faction depends less on how popular its ideas are with voters, and more on how well it has captured the party’s internal machinery. The loudest internal bloc wins, not the one that speaks for most people.

That’s why major parties can drift so far from the centre of public opinion. The battles for control happen in smoke-filled committee rooms, not at the ballot box.

With Proportional Representation, the negotiations are public

Proportional representation (PR) doesn’t remove negotiation, it makes it public and democratic. Every party earns influence based on how many people actually vote for them. The horse-trading happens out in the open, not behind closed doors.

Under PR, strength in Parliament reflects support in the country. The parties talk to each other because they have to, and because voters told them to. The result is politics that rewards cooperation, not control.

It’s time for a system that works for all of us

We deserve a government that reflects the choices we make, not the failures of a voting system. Proportional representation gives us that. It’s fair, it’s transparent, and it works.