Correct Option
The correct option is FPTP is simpler for ordinary voters and offers a clear choice between specific candidates..
Explanation
The Constituent Assembly of India debated various methods of election, primarily choosing between the First Past the Post (FPTP) system and the system of Proportional Representation (PR). The decision was heavily influenced by the need for a system suitable for a vast, diverse, and largely illiterate electorate, as well as the necessity for political stability.
Option Analysis
- FPTP is simpler for ordinary voters and offers a clear choice between specific candidates. is Correct: The primary reason for adopting FPTP was its simplicity. In the FPTP system, voters choose a specific candidate rather than just a party. This mechanism was considered easier for ordinary voters to understand compared to the complex calculations involved in PR (such as the Single Transferable Vote). Additionally, FPTP fosters a direct link between the representative and the constituency, ensuring accountability. It also tends to facilitate the formation of a stable government by often giving the winning party a disproportionately higher number of seats compared to its vote share.
- PR was considered too expensive to implement in a large country. is Incorrect: While administrative challenges were considered, the cost of implementation was not the primary constitutional or philosophical reason for rejecting PR. The main concerns were complexity and the potential for political instability.
- FPTP ensures that every social group gets representation in proportion to its population. is Incorrect: This statement describes a feature of Proportional Representation (PR), not FPTP. Under FPTP, there is often a significant discrepancy between the percentage of votes a party receives and the number of seats it wins. It does not guarantee representation in proportion to the population of social groups.
- PR systems strictly prohibit the formation of coalition governments. is Incorrect: PR systems do not prohibit coalition governments. On the contrary, PR systems often lead to fragmented legislatures where no single party gets a majority, thereby encouraging the formation of coalition governments. The Constituent Assembly preferred FPTP partly to avoid this fragmentation and ensure a stable executive.
Key Takeaway: The FPTP system was chosen over Proportional Representation primarily for its simplicity for the voter, the provision of a clear choice between candidates, and its tendency to produce a stable government with a clear majority.