United Kingdom General Election, 2024 (Proportional Representation)

The 2024 United Kingdom general election was held on Thursday, 14 November 2024, to elect all members of the newly expanded House of Commons using the recently implemented Mixed Member Proportional Representation (MMP) electoral system. This election marked a significant shift in British electoral politics, moving away from the traditional first-past-the-post system for the first time in a general election. The election resulted in a hung parliament, with no single party securing an overall majority. Following a period of negotiations, a "traffic light coalition" government was formed, comprising the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, and the Green Party of England and Wales.

Background

Political Context

The lead-up to the 2024 general election was marked by a period of considerable political and economic turbulence in the United Kingdom. The aftermath of both Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic continued to cast a long shadow, with ongoing debates about the UK's future relationship with the European Union, economic instability driven by inflation and supply chain disruptions, and persistent concerns about the cost of living crisis. The preceding Conservative government, led by Rishi Sunak, had struggled to maintain public confidence amid these challenges, facing criticism over its handling of industrial action, particularly in the National Health Service (NHS), and its perceived lack of coherent long-term economic strategy.

Public dissatisfaction had also grown in response to a series of controversies surrounding government ethics and accountability, echoing sentiments from previous years. While the Conservative Party had secured a significant majority in the 2019 general election under Boris Johnson, their popularity had steadily declined throughout the early 2020s. This decline was exacerbated by internal divisions within the party, particularly between different factions on issues such as taxation, public spending, and environmental policy.

The opposition parties sought to capitalize on this discontent. The Labour Party, under the leadership of Sir Keir Starmer, had repositioned itself as a credible alternative government, emphasizing economic competence, public service reform, and a commitment to addressing regional inequalities. The Liberal Democrats, led by Sir Ed Davey, aimed to regain ground lost in previous elections by focusing on their pro-European stance and highlighting issues of civil liberties and electoral reform. The Green Party of England and Wales, with co-leader Carla Denyer, experienced a surge in support, driven by growing public awareness of climate change and environmental issues, alongside a broader appeal to younger voters and those concerned about social justice.

Electoral Reform

The most significant factor shaping the 2024 election was the recent implementation of proportional representation for general elections. For decades, the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system had been a cornerstone of the UK political landscape, consistently delivering majority governments, but also criticized for its disproportionality and for marginalizing smaller parties. Calls for electoral reform had grown louder over time, particularly after the 2016 European Union membership referendum, which exposed deep divisions within the electorate and prompted wider questions about the representativeness of the political system.

Following a period of cross-party consultation and public debate, the Electoral Reform Act 2023 was passed by Parliament, introducing the Mixed Member Proportional Representation (MMP) system for general elections in the United Kingdom. This system aimed to combine the constituency representation of FPTP with the proportionality of party-list systems. Under MMP, voters cast two ballots: one for a local constituency candidate and one for a political party. A proportion of seats in the House of Commons are allocated to constituency candidates elected using FPTP, while additional "top-up" seats are allocated to parties based on their national vote share, ensuring that the overall composition of Parliament more closely reflects the national popular vote.

The introduction of MMP fundamentally altered the dynamics of the 2024 election. It was widely anticipated that it would lead to a more fragmented political landscape, making majority governments less likely and coalition governments or minority administrations more common. Political parties had to adapt their campaign strategies to account for the new system, focusing not only on winning individual constituencies but also on maximizing their national party vote share. The smaller parties, particularly the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party, were expected to benefit from MMP, as their support was previously geographically dispersed, making it difficult for them to win seats under FPTP. Conversely, the two major parties, Labour and the Conservatives, faced the challenge of adjusting to a system where their dominance was no longer guaranteed.

Electoral System

The Mixed Member Proportional Representation (MMP) system adopted for the 2024 UK general election was based on a model often referred to as the "Regionalized Supplementary Member System" – a uniquely British adaptation tailored to the country's existing political and geographic structures. It sought to balance the principles of proportionality and local representation, aiming for a system that was both fairer and more accountable to voters.

Structure of MMP in the UK

Under the Regionalized Supplementary Member System, the House of Commons was expanded to 750 seats to accommodate the dual-ballot structure of MMP and to ensure adequate representation for both constituency and regional list Members of Parliament (MPs). Of these 750 seats:

• 450 seats were allocated as Constituency Seats, elected using the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system. Constituency boundaries were redrawn to account for the increased number of seats and to ensure roughly equal electorate sizes across constituencies. These constituencies remained geographically based, representing local communities across the United Kingdom. Voters cast one ballot for their preferred constituency candidate, with the candidate receiving the most votes in each constituency being elected.
• 300 seats were allocated as Regional List Seats, distributed across twelve newly defined regions of the United Kingdom. These regions were broadly based on existing governmental regions but with some adjustments to ensure roughly equal population sizes and to respect historical and cultural boundaries. For example, the "North of England" region was subdivided into "Northern Pennines", "Northwestern Coastlands", and "Northumbrian Belt" to better reflect regional identities. Political parties nominated lists of candidates for each region, and voters cast a second ballot for their preferred party in their region. Regional List Seats were allocated using the D'Hondt method of proportional representation, a highest-averages method, to ensure that the overall regional seat allocation for each party was proportional to their regional vote share.

Seat Allocation and Proportionality

The key feature of the Regionalized Supplementary Member System was its mechanism for achieving proportionality. The allocation of Regional List Seats was designed to compensate for any disproportionality arising from the constituency seat results. The process worked as follows:

1. Constituency Seat Allocation: The 450 Constituency Seats were filled first, based solely on the FPTP results in each constituency. This resulted in an initial, potentially disproportional, allocation of seats to parties based on constituency-level outcomes.
2. Regional Vote Calculation: National party vote shares were calculated based on the regional party list votes cast across all regions. These regional votes were aggregated to determine the overall national vote share for each party.
3. Regional List Seat Allocation: The 300 Regional List Seats were then allocated to parties within each region using the D'Hondt method, taking into account the constituency seats already won by each party within that region. The aim was to adjust the overall seat totals for each party in each region to more closely reflect their regional vote share. Essentially, parties that won a disproportionately high number of constituency seats in a region would receive fewer Regional List Seats in that region, and vice versa. This compensatory mechanism ensured that the final national seat allocation was significantly more proportional to the national party vote share than FPTP alone would have produced.

For example, if a party won a large number of constituency seats in a particular region due to concentrated support, they would likely receive fewer Regional List Seats in that region to balance out their overall representation. Conversely, parties with geographically dispersed support, who might win fewer constituency seats, would gain Regional List Seats to reflect their broader appeal.

Impact and Implications

The Regionalized Supplementary Member System was designed to mitigate some of the perceived drawbacks of both FPTP and pure party-list systems. By retaining constituency seats, it maintained a direct link between voters and their local representatives, considered a crucial aspect of British political tradition. At the same time, by adding Regional List Seats allocated proportionally, it addressed the issue of disproportionality inherent in FPTP, ensuring that smaller parties with significant national support could gain fairer representation in Parliament.

The choice of the Regional List system over a purely national list system was deliberate. Regional lists aimed to provide an additional layer of regional representation, acknowledging the diverse regional identities and interests within the United Kingdom. It also allowed for a degree of regional variation in party strength to be reflected in the overall parliamentary composition. The D'Hondt method was chosen for its relative simplicity and its tendency to favor larger parties slightly more than some other proportional methods, which was seen as a way to promote stable government formation while still ensuring proportionality.

Campaign

The 2024 general election campaign, the first under the new MMP system, was characterized by a greater fluidity and unpredictability than previous elections held under FPTP. Political parties had to adapt their strategies, messages, and resource allocation to account for the two-ballot system and the changed electoral calculus. The campaign officially commenced after King Charles III, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, dissolved Parliament on 10 October 2024, setting the election date for 14 November.

Key Campaign Issues

Several key issues dominated the campaign discourse, reflecting the major concerns facing the British electorate at the time:

• Cost of Living and Economy: The soaring cost of living, driven by inflation and energy price increases, was consistently ranked as the top concern by voters. All parties put forward proposals to address the economic challenges, with debates focusing on taxation, public spending, energy policy, and support for low-income households. The Labour Party emphasized wealth taxes and increased public investment, while the Conservatives prioritized fiscal responsibility and tax cuts to stimulate economic growth. The Liberal Democrats proposed targeted support for vulnerable households and a focus on green economic policies. The Green Party called for radical wealth redistribution and a Green New Deal to tackle both economic inequality and climate change.
• National Health Service (NHS): The NHS remained a perennial concern, with long waiting lists, staff shortages, and funding pressures dominating public discourse. Labour pledged to increase NHS funding and reform its structure to improve efficiency and access. The Conservatives highlighted their record investment in the NHS but faced criticism over privatization concerns and ongoing operational challenges. The Liberal Democrats advocated for a preventative healthcare approach and increased investment in mental health services. The Green Party called for a fully publicly funded and integrated health and social care system.
• Climate Change and Environment: Climate change and environmental issues rose significantly in prominence during the campaign, particularly following a series of extreme weather events in the UK during the preceding summer. The Green Party made climate action their central campaign platform, advocating for ambitious emissions reduction targets and a transition to a low-carbon economy. Labour and the Liberal Democrats also put forward strong environmental policies, committing to net-zero targets and investment in renewable energy. The Conservatives, while also committed to net-zero, faced scrutiny over their pace of action and continued support for fossil fuel projects.
• Brexit and International Relations: While less dominant than in previous elections, Brexit remained a background issue. The parties differed on their approaches to post-Brexit trade deals, relationships with the European Union, and the UK's international role. The Liberal Democrats advocated for closer alignment with the EU, while Labour sought a "pragmatic" post-Brexit relationship. The Conservatives emphasized the opportunities of Brexit and promised to deliver on its perceived benefits. The Reform Party, under Nigel Farage, campaigned for a more radical departure from the EU and stricter immigration controls.
• Cost of Living Crisis and Energy Security: The interplay between the cost of living surge, particularly energy prices, and energy security became a critical focal point. The war in Ukraine and its impact on global energy markets amplified concerns about energy independence and affordability. The parties debated the merits of renewable energy investments, nuclear power, and continued reliance on fossil fuels. Labour and the Green Party strongly emphasized renewable energy and energy efficiency measures, while the Conservatives took a more mixed approach, including support for nuclear and continued North Sea oil and gas exploration.

Party Strategies and Slogans

The major parties adopted distinct strategies to navigate the MMP system and appeal to voters:

• Labour Party: Under Sir Keir Starmer, Labour aimed to project an image of competence, stability, and economic responsibility. Their campaign slogan, "Build a Fairer Future," emphasized their commitment to tackling inequality and improving public services. Labour focused heavily on the cost of living crisis and the NHS, promising practical solutions and highlighting perceived Conservative failures. Starmer sought to appeal to a broad range of voters, including swing voters in traditionally Conservative-leaning constituencies, positioning Labour as a credible government-in-waiting. Labour’s campaign also heavily utilized digital and social media platforms to directly engage with voters and disseminate their message.
• Conservative Party: Rishi Sunak led the Conservative campaign, attempting to emphasize economic stability and his experience as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Their slogan, "Delivering for Britain," sought to portray the Conservatives as the party best placed to manage the economy and deliver on national priorities. The Conservatives focused on tax cuts, controlling government spending, and highlighting their record on Brexit. They also sought to raise concerns about the perceived economic risks of a Labour government. The Conservatives faced the challenge of defending their record after a long period in power and overcoming public fatigue and dissatisfaction. Their campaign strategy also involved emphasizing constituency-level campaigns to maximize their seat count under the FPTP component of MMP.
• Liberal Democrats: Sir Ed Davey spearheaded the Liberal Democrat campaign, targeting voters disillusioned with both the Conservatives and Labour. Their slogan, "Fair Deal for Britain," highlighted their commitment to electoral reform, environmental protection, and social justice. The Liberal Democrats focused on winning constituency seats in areas where they had a strong local presence and aimed to maximize their party list vote share to secure additional seats. Their campaign emphasized their distinctive policy positions, particularly on Brexit and civil liberties, seeking to differentiate themselves from the larger parties. A key part of their strategy was to highlight the benefits of proportional representation itself, arguing it would lead to fairer and more representative government.
• Green Party of England and Wales: Co-led by Carla Denyer, the Green Party ran their most ambitious general election campaign to date. Their slogan, "Real Hope, Real Change," aimed to capitalize on growing public concern about climate change and social inequality. The Green Party campaigned for radical policies to address the climate crisis, promote social justice, and transform the economy. They focused on attracting younger voters and those increasingly disillusioned with mainstream politics. Under MMP, the Green Party had a realistic chance of significantly increasing their parliamentary representation, and their campaign emphasized the importance of the party list vote to achieve this.
• Reform Party: Led by Nigel Farage, the Reform Party positioned itself as the true Brexit party and a populist alternative to the mainstream parties. Their slogan, "Britain First," emphasized their nationalist agenda, stricter immigration controls, and skepticism towards climate change policies. The Reform Party primarily targeted voters who felt left behind by globalization and traditional political establishments. Under MMP, they aimed to capitalize on their concentrated support base and secure party list seats, although their chances of winning constituency seats remained limited.

Campaign Events and Dynamics

The campaign was fast-paced and dynamic, with numerous televised debates, policy announcements, and campaign rallies. The introduction of MMP led to a greater focus on regional campaigning and localized strategies. Party leaders crisscrossed the country, targeting key regions and constituencies. Televised debates between party leaders were heavily watched and scrutinized, particularly the first leaders' debate which saw Starmer, Sunak, Davey, and Denyer clash over economic policy and the future of the NHS.

Social media played an increasingly prominent role in the campaign, with parties using platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and TikTok to reach voters directly, mobilize supporters, and counter opponents' narratives. Fact-checking organizations were also active, scrutinizing campaign claims and combating misinformation, particularly around economic statistics and policy proposals. The campaign witnessed a surge in voter registration, particularly among young people, driven in part by the perception that MMP would make their votes more impactful.

Results

The 2024 general election took place on 14 November, with polling stations open from 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM. The election count commenced immediately after the polls closed, with results being declared throughout the night and into the following day. The introduction of MMP led to a slightly longer counting process due to the two-ballot system and the allocation of regional list seats. However, the overall process was efficiently managed by local returning officers and the Electoral Commission.

National Results Overview

The election resulted in a hung parliament, with no single party securing an overall majority of the 750 seats in the House of Commons. The final national results were as follows:

Party	Leader	Constituency Seats	Regional List Seats	Total Seats	National Vote Share (Party List)	+/- Seats (vs. hypothetical FPTP 2019)
Labour Party	Sir Keir Starmer	165	63	228	29.5%	+25
Conservative Party	Rishi Sunak	105	34	139	21.0%	-225
Liberal Democrats	Sir Ed Davey	32	41	73	11.5%	+62
Green Party of England and Wales	Carla Denyer	18	53	71	10.8%	+70
Reform Party	Nigel Farage	5	95	100	15.2%	+100 (New Party, compared to Brexit Party)
Scottish National Party (SNP)	Humza Yousaf	40	5	45	3.0% (Scotland only)	-3
Plaid Cymru	Rhun ap Iorwerth	4	1	5	0.5% (Wales only)	+1
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)	Sir Jeffrey Donaldson	8	1	9	0.3% (UK-wide)	+1
Sinn Féin	Mary Lou McDonald	7	0	7	0.2% (UK-wide)	+0
Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP)	Colum Eastwood	1	0	1	0.1% (UK-wide)	+0
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland	Naomi Long	1	0	1	0.1% (UK-wide)	+0
Other Parties and Independents		28	0	28	7.8%	+19
Total		450	300	750	100.0%

Note: Hypothetical FPTP 2019 figures are for illustrative purposes only, based on national vote share shifts applied to the 2019 election results under FPTP.

Analysis of Results

The results of the 2024 general election represented a seismic shift in British politics, largely attributable to the introduction of proportional representation. The Conservative Party, which had enjoyed a large majority under FPTP in 2019, suffered a dramatic reduction in seats, losing over half of their previous total. This decline reflected a combination of factors, including public dissatisfaction with the government's record, the impact of the cost of living crisis, and the fragmentation of the right-of-center vote between the Conservatives and the Reform Party.

The Labour Party emerged as the largest party in the House of Commons, but fell short of an overall majority. While their seat count was significantly higher than in previous elections, the MMP system arguably limited their potential gains compared to what they might have achieved under FPTP with a similar level of national vote share. However, Labour's gains were substantial enough to position them as the leading party in government formation negotiations.

The Liberal Democrats and the Green Party were the clear beneficiaries of the MMP system. Both parties significantly increased their seat share compared to previous elections under FPTP. The Liberal Democrats more than doubled their seat count, reflecting their broadly distributed national support and their appeal to pro-European voters and centrists. The Green Party experienced an even more dramatic surge, becoming a major force in Parliament for the first time, reflecting the growing public concern about climate change and the environment, particularly among younger voters.

The rise of the Reform Party was another significant feature of the election results. While they only won a small number of constituency seats, their strong performance in the party list vote secured them a substantial block of seats, primarily at the expense of the Conservatives. This demonstrated the continued strength of populist and Eurosceptic sentiment within the electorate.

The Scottish National Party (SNP) remained the dominant party in Scotland, although their seat total slightly declined compared to previous elections. Plaid Cymru in Wales maintained a smaller presence, while the Northern Irish parties continued to represent their respective communities, with little overall change in their seat distribution. The "Other Parties and Independents" category included a diverse range of smaller parties and independent candidates, some of whom benefited from the greater proportionality of MMP and the potential for localized campaigns to resonate with voters.

Government Formation

The hung parliament created by the 2024 general election necessitated a period of intense negotiations between political parties to explore options for government formation. No single party had the numbers to govern alone, making coalition or confidence-and-supply arrangements essential. The most viable and ultimately successful outcome was the formation of a "traffic light coalition" government, comprising the Labour Party (red), the Liberal Democrats (yellow), and the Green Party of England and Wales (green).

Coalition Negotiations

Following the election results, Sir Keir Starmer, as leader of the largest party, initiated discussions with Sir Ed Davey and Carla Denyer to explore the possibility of a coalition government. The Conservatives, led by Rishi Sunak, also explored options, but their significantly reduced seat count and the strong ideological differences with the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party made a Conservative-led coalition less likely. The Reform Party was generally considered to be outside the mainstream of coalition politics due to their more radical policy positions.

The negotiations between Labour, the Liberal Democrats, and the Green Party were complex, spanning several days and focusing on key policy areas and power-sharing arrangements. Major points of discussion included:

• Economic Policy: Negotiations centered around the balance between fiscal responsibility and public investment, particularly in the NHS, education, and green infrastructure. The Green Party pushed for more radical wealth redistribution and a commitment to a Green New Deal, while the Liberal Democrats emphasized fiscal prudence and targeted support for vulnerable households. Labour sought to bridge these positions, emphasizing economic stability alongside increased public spending in priority areas.
• Climate Change and Environment: Strong consensus existed on the need for ambitious climate action, but differences emerged on the pace and scale of policy implementation. The Green Party advocated for the most aggressive emissions reduction targets and a rapid transition away from fossil fuels. The Liberal Democrats also prioritized environmental policies but with a greater emphasis on market-based mechanisms. Labour, while committed to net-zero, sought to balance climate action with economic competitiveness and energy security.
• Electoral Reform: Electoral reform, ironically, having just been implemented, became a point of contention for the future. The Liberal Democrats, long-standing advocates of proportional representation, sought guarantees for further electoral reforms in the future, potentially including reforms to the House of Lords and local government elections. Labour, while having enacted MMP for general elections, was less enthusiastic about further reforms, fearing potential instability. The Green Party broadly supported further electoral reform. A compromise was reached to establish a cross-party commission to review the operation of MMP in practice and to consider further reforms in the longer term.
• Power Sharing and Cabinet Positions: Negotiations also involved the allocation of cabinet positions and ministerial responsibilities within the coalition government. The proportional seat share of each party was a key factor in these discussions. Agreement was reached to allocate cabinet portfolios to reflect the relative strengths of the coalition partners, with Labour holding the most senior positions, but with significant representation for the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party.

Formation of the Traffic Light Coalition

After several days of intensive negotiations, Sir Keir Starmer, Sir Ed Davey, and Carla Denyer announced that they had reached an agreement to form a coalition government. The agreement, formally titled the "Partnership for a Sustainable and Fairer Britain," outlined the shared policy priorities and the framework for coalition governance.

Key features of the coalition agreement included:

• Joint Policy Programme: A detailed policy programme encompassing economic policy, NHS reform, climate action, social justice, and constitutional reform, reflecting the priorities of all three coalition partners. This included commitments to increased NHS funding, a significant expansion of renewable energy investment, measures to tackle the cost of living crisis, and reforms to social care and education.
• Cabinet and Ministerial Appointments: Agreement on the allocation of cabinet positions and ministerial responsibilities, ensuring representation for all three parties. Sir Keir Starmer became Prime Minister, with Sir Ed Davey appointed as Deputy Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Carla Denyer taking the role of Secretary of State for Climate Change and the Environment. Other key cabinet positions were distributed amongst the three parties, reflecting the coalition's multi-party nature.
• Coalition Management Mechanisms: Establishment of mechanisms for coalition management, including regular meetings between party leaders, a coalition cabinet committee, and a joint parliamentary whips office to ensure smooth functioning and policy coordination. This framework aimed to promote trust and cooperation within the coalition government.
• Commitment to Proportional Representation: A firm commitment to maintaining the Mixed Member Proportional Representation (MMP) system for future general elections and to the establishment of a cross-party commission to review its operation and consider further electoral reforms.

On 20 November 2024, Sir Keir Starmer was formally appointed as Prime Minister by King Charles III, marking the official formation of the "traffic light coalition" government. This marked a historic moment in British politics, the first time a three-party coalition had governed the UK and the first government formed under the new proportional representation system.

Aftermath

The formation of the "traffic light coalition" government was met with a mixed reaction. Supporters of the Labour, Liberal Democrat, and Green parties celebrated the outcome, seeing it as a progressive and transformative moment for British politics. They welcomed the prospect of a government committed to tackling inequality, addressing the climate crisis, and reforming public services. The introduction of proportional representation was seen by many as having delivered a fairer and more representative outcome, reflecting the diverse views of the electorate.

However, critics, particularly within the Conservative Party and the Reform Party, expressed concerns about the stability and coherence of a three-party coalition. They questioned whether the coalition could deliver effective governance given the potentially divergent policy positions of its constituent parties. Some commentators also argued that the MMP system had led to a fragmented political landscape and made it more difficult to form strong and decisive governments. Critics within the Reform Party expressed strong disapproval of any coalition that did not prioritize a more radical Brexit agenda and stricter immigration controls.

Initial Policy Priorities and Challenges

The newly formed "traffic light coalition" government immediately set about implementing its joint policy programme. Key initial priorities included:

• Cost of Living Support Package: Introducing a package of measures to address the cost of living crisis, including targeted support for low-income households, energy price controls, and measures to tackle inflation. This was seen as a crucial early test of the coalition's ability to respond effectively to pressing economic challenges.
• NHS Winter Plan: Preparing the NHS for the winter months, traditionally a period of peak demand and pressure on services. This involved increased funding for frontline services, measures to reduce waiting lists, and efforts to address staff shortages. The coalition aimed to demonstrate its commitment to strengthening and reforming the NHS as a public service.
• Climate Emergency Response: Launching a series of policy initiatives to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy and meet the UK's climate targets. This included investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency programs, and measures to protect biodiversity and the natural environment. The Green Party's influence was expected to be particularly significant in this policy area.
• Constitutional Reform Agenda: Initiating the promised cross-party commission to review the operation of Mixed Member Proportional Representation (MMP) and consider further electoral reforms. This signaled the coalition's commitment to ongoing democratic reform and to addressing concerns about the representativeness of the political system.

The "traffic light coalition" government faced numerous challenges from the outset. Managing the diverse policy priorities and ideological nuances of three parties required careful negotiation and compromise. Maintaining public confidence and demonstrating effective governance in a complex economic and political environment was paramount. The long-term stability and success of the coalition government remained to be seen, but its formation marked a significant turning point in the history of British politics, ushering in a new era of multi-party politics under proportional representation.

```