Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Navigate Up
Sign In

Single Transferable Vote explained

The Single Transferable Vote (STV) method of voting is used around the world, notably in government elections in the Republic of Ireland and Australia. The University’s Single Transferable Vote regulations apply one of several recognised variants of STV.

The following explanation of the Single Transferable Vote is republished by permission of the Electoral Reform Society

About the Single Transferable Vote 

The Single Transferable Vote is a logical system of election designed to attain its objectives with economy, efficiency and certainty. It ensures that as far as possible every vote has a positive part in helping to elect some candidate, that no voting power is wasted and that no voter has a greater influence on the result than any other.

This is achieved by giving each elector ONE vote, irrespective of the number of vacancies to be filled, and making that vote transferable. Voting papers are completed by placing the candidates into a preferred order against the figure ‘1’, ‘2’, ‘3’, etc. The figure ‘1’ represents the vote and is mandatory.* The rest are contingency markings and optional but important as they can influence the final result. For that reason the elector is recommended to express preferences until he/she is unable to differentiate between any remaining candidates.

When votes are counted, the Returning Officer works to a Quota. This is the number of votes a candidate requires to be certain of election and is calculated to a simple arithmetical formula.

Any candidate elected with more votes than needed (i.e. above the quota) has surplus votes transferred to the remaining candidates – again using a set formula. Votes of any candidates excluded from the count through insufficient support are also transferred. In both cases the contingency markings come into play, and thereby avoids votes being wasted as would be the case in the first-past-the-post election.

It is important to remember that under no circumstances can a later preference count against an earlier preference and that failure to record preferences can limit the elector’s influence on the election result.

Prepared by Electoral Reform Services Limited

* Please note that, under the University’s STV regulations for elections, candidates are placed in preferred order by name against the numbers ‘1’, ‘2’, etc.