AV referendum

[ecuworrier]

dunno if anyone else has received the 'no' campaign literature ... what do you think does it change the face of your decision making?

was chatting yesterday about AV with a member of an intelligent family that were all voting for different things following  vibrant debate....

at this point i am undecided... i am pissed off cos these referendum things do lend to voting on the basis of all sorts of things everything but the direct question one is asked really cos one just cannot say well i is voting this cos or not voting this cos.... they can't be trusted to do anything intelligent and honest with the lists of boxes and the stuff what's not filled in

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[Martin]

I will be drawing an extra box on my ballot paper for Single Transferable Vote, and then voting for that.

All that the referendum on AV has done is to allow people who oppose electoral reform because their chosen party does well out of the current system, to say that the country doesn't want electoral reform.

[saundthorp]

Martin,

All that the referendum on AV has done is to allow people who oppose electoral reform because their chosen party does well out of the current system, to say that the country doesn't want electoral reform.

The more I think about AV the worse it sounds. I have been thinking about one aspect recently. If the first count is inconclusive the candidate with the lowest number of votes is eliminated and the alterative votes of the people who voted for them are then used in a second count. Who usually comes bottom, weirdo candidates including the BNP. So people who vote for parties like the Monster Raving Loony Party and the BNP will have their second preferences taken into account....OMG

[Boudi]

I seem to be falling in favour of it, though I can see some of the problems people have.  We got a 'no' leaflet and it was such a bit of bile that it's swung me against it.  I think that if this is the method they use instead of proper argument then there must be a case for the other side.

[AndyHB]

So people who vote for parties like the Monster Raving Loony Party and the BNP will have their second preferences taken into account....OMG

Not quite that simple, Saundthorpe.  Each count acts as an election in itself, so everyone's vote is counted as many times as there are counts.  We may even find that some BNP supporters - like those of any party - only cast a single vote.

I'd agree with Martin that the Single Transferable Vote system would be better, but I think that if we can get AV onto the statute books, it'll be easier to move towards proper PR in the future.  If the 'No' campaign wins, I can't see another attempt to change the system for another 40 or 50 years.

Boudi's point is also very true.  If a party/campaign is as unable to put up good arguments for their position, and simply resort to abuse and half-truths, their position probably has little or nothing going for it.

[JJ]

Martin,

All that the referendum on AV has done is to allow people who oppose electoral reform because their chosen party does well out of the current system, to say that the country doesn't want electoral reform.

The more I think about AV the worse it sounds. I have been thinking about one aspect recently. If the first count is inconclusive the candidate with the lowest number of votes is eliminated and the alterative votes of the people who voted for them are then used in a second count. Who usually comes bottom, weirdo candidates including the BNP. So people who vote for parties like the Monster Raving Loony Party and the BNP will have their second preferences taken into account....OMG

Well if we have a democracy then they have a right to have their second choice counted instead just as I have the right to have my (more sensible  ) second choice counted if my first choice is not in the majority.

[ecuworrier]

mmm is there any reason why someone shouldn't have some say in the running of theri country just cos one doesn't like theri choice of candidate?

that is the one aspect that i do like abojt the system that it gives folks a say.... i liked the Monster Raving Loonie manifesto at the last general election and if we had a candidate would certainly consider voting for them in preference to many others...

besides.. folks making the best of their reasoned choices for fringe candidates are often politically disenfranchised whether it is simply a healthy distrust of politics or more grave unmet concerns about 'the way the country is run and how they feel affected .....   

democracy will always generate losers that can be any of us within a single constituency it is in it's nature but at least there is an opportunity for a plan B even if it does not quite come off

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[AndyHB]

Here in Wales, we have quite a good Assembly election system.  We have FPTP for the named constituency candidate, but then there are additional seats for regional candidates: these are unnamed, so you vote for a party rather than a person.  The regional seats are then divided according to the proportions the various parties get of that vote.  It means that small parties such as the Greens could, this time, get their first Assembly member.

[tranchiebabe]

I voted Green for the first time (postal vote) as I am fed up with the rest, not that I am more than a lukewarm environmentalist, and consider I have done my bit by recycling and turning off unnecessary lights.

[Martin]

but I think that if we can get AV onto the statute books, it'll be easier to move towards proper PR in the future.  If the 'No' campaign wins, I can't see another attempt to change the system for another 40 or 50 years.

I'm not convinced by this argument.  Although I have to admit that there's a chance that AV will move us closer to a fair system, I think it's more likely that people will say "well we've changed the electoral system so we don't need another change", and I think, if AV is rejected, then the deficiencies of the current system will still be starkly apparent and it will be easier to argue that we weren't given the right choice this time and need to actually be asked about a truly proportional system.

Also, the people most likely to keep banging the drum for fairer votes, the Liberal Democrats, will, if AV comes in, do very nicely out of it thank you, and will consistently hold the balance of power, and I wonder how much incentive there will be to push for a further change to the voting system.

So I think that, probably, a 'No' vote this time will hold more chance for a truly democratic system of voting in the future.

[ecuworrier]

Here in Wales, we have quite a good Assembly election system.  We have FPTP for the named constituency candidate, but then there are additional seats for regional candidates: these are unnamed, so you vote for a party rather than a person.  The regional seats are then divided according to the proportions the various parties get of that vote.  It means that small parties such as the Greens could, this time, get their first Assembly member.

this is all welsh assembly is it? do you have three layers of regional representation one FPTP in houses of parliament one FPTP in the assembly itself and additional regional prvoted.... can't quite see how it works even at the regional level ... it sounds a bit european

but would AV improve or what...?


GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[ecuworrier]

bbc seems to have had a bit of a blackout on the AV debate thing.. what with death of british boxing icons and libya and all that....

but the issue has untangled itself in Cameron versus Clegg row... where Clegg proclaims to not have computers to do counts cos he is in charge of the AV thing .... er i think he has lost perspective someplace...   and Cameron declares that they would inevitably have to have computers which would cost loads..

must pick up the pamphlet

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[administrator]

The problem with AV is that it is not PR.
 
 

[ecuworrier]

The problem with AV is that it is not PR.

and the problem with that observation is that the voter cannot demonstrate the difference...

that is why i is pissed off.... i mean what is not happening is that there is a proper debate about what the no vote ie no to AV means or the no vote to status quo means it's really pathetic considering the one thing an elected member to the house should understand is the complexity of voting stuff... meanwhile just to keep cleggy happy with a stoopid compromise we is stuffed by the idiots as an electorate not being given a real say as to what we would like to vote on as change


mind you the only vote i really want is to see the complete backend of the tories and libdems like forever....

which would leave a completely real political vacuum to be fought over
GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[administrator]

The problem with AV is that it is not PR.

and the problem with that observation is that the voter cannot demonstrate the difference...

that is why i is pissed off.... i mean what is not happening is that there is a proper debate about what the no vote ie no to AV means or the no vote to status quo means it's really pathetic considering the one thing an elected member to the house should understand is the complexity of voting stuff... meanwhile just to keep cleggy happy with a stoopid compromise we is stuffed by the idiots as an electorate not being given a real say as to what we would like to vote on as change


mind you the only vote i really want is to see the complete backend of the tories and libdems like forever....

which would leave a completely real political vacuum to be fought over
GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

I think the reasoning behind the compromise is that the parties are already familiar with AV as they all use it to elect their leaders. this would get more within politics on board the AV campaign from the start.
AV, I fear will turn more people off voting at all, which in it's self might not be a bad thing.