h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'd say rumours of our decline are greatly exagerrated! Whilst the reducing the number of constituencies is clearly predicatedo n the basis of helping the Tories their relative levels of support and Labour's mean that they will still be two tribes sharing power.

AV does change some stuff because it will change voting behavior. Preferential voting means that for example I might consider voting for my local Jury Team candidate if I liked them whereas under FPTP I *have* to use my vote instrumentally if I want it to matter. That means chosing between the two candidates competing in my seat. Usually one of Labour/Lib vs a Tory.

I must say if the argument is vote no and hope that the Tories get a disproportionate amount of power based on their support for so long that Labour will eventually come around to the idea of a fair voting system doesn't sound like a compelling argument to me. Not least because all of the "facts" for that argument already exist and the Labour "No" campaign is already very powerful. They would be even more opposed to PR.

FB

The main thrust of Labour's "vote NO" campaign is summed up here:
http://labourlist.org/vote-labour-vote-no-

Clearly, the main reason for 'no' is one of self-interest .. not whether the system is fairer to the electorate.

The argument about which party benefits from a change to AV is pretty selfish, imo .. it's also hypocritical when you realise that the parties use it in their own internal elections.

As usual, one set of rules for the 'rule-makers', and another for the common person .. is that 'Labour' showing it's *equal* ideology yet again?

>>Well my view is AV changes nothing<<

That's your view after reading through this entire thread and
following the links?

In the greater scheme of things, pretty much tarantoes*. For all the talk of votes trickling down to smaller parties the effect of AV in most cases will be to reinforce the original result. In crude left/right terms we're likely to see a left-leaning voter vote Labour/LibDem/Green/A.N. Other whilst a right-leaning voter will vote Conservative/UKIP/A.N.Other. The 2nd/3rd choices will more than likely balance out or, if anything, shift the balance to Labour a fraction.

Under FPTP, 60-70% of voters typically don't see their candidate win.
Under AV, 60-70% of voters typically won't see their first choice candidate win.

*I confess I've been on the road the last couple of weeks with limited internet access so I may not have read all the links.

OK, I get to vote tomorrow using a form of PR (not quite AV, but along similar lines)

I have a list of candidates to choose from, and I can rank as many as I wish to.

So, there's a Green candidate. I can give them first preference. I know they wont get in, but some statistician somewhere will be compiling the list of number of first pref votes, and show the rising trend for the Greens

There's Alliance, my natural party of choice. I'll probably put them high on the list, possibly 2nd. There's also a well respected independent candidate, she'll probably get onto my list somewhere too. And maybe the SDLP, haven't decided.

But I'm glad I can put more than one candidate - ask me to narrow down my choice of "acceptables" to just the one, and I'd struggle.

I've weighed stuff up and shall be voting A/V because I think the overwhelming priority now is to make people feel less disillusioned about politics and politicians..also one can still just put a 1 against one name. I'm still a bit torn.

And for simple irrational reasons I'm now starting to feel a greater loathing for Cameron than Clegg.

I expect FPTP to win though with a tiny turn out.

>>Under FPTP, 60-70% of voters typically don't see their candidate win.
Under AV, 60-70% of voters typically won't see their first choice candidate win.<<

In the last general election in 2010 one MP got elected on 29.4% of
the constituency vote. If we also take into account the percentage
that actually vote then we can begin to assess what democracy means
in this country with its "FPTP" / constituency form of government.

With AV this particular constituency would have gone to a second round
and further rounds until one candidate got over 50% of the
constituency vote. This would have provided a democratic assurance
that over 50% of the voters contributed to this persons election
(whether first choice, or first + second choice, etc). Ultimately
one has to be convinced this would be a better, more representative
and inclusive form of democracy than what we already have to vote
for AV.

In the past when there was essentially only two candidates to choose
from the FPTP system resulted in one candidate getting over 50% of
the vote and hence the democratic constituency mandate. However
nowadays with three to five valid candidates this no longer applies
in general.

Ultimately each to their own choice, but with ever decreasing numbers
of people voting the system could do with a little invigorating. .

>>*I confess I've been on the road the last couple of weeks with limited internet access so I may not have read all the links.<<

In which case it is worth providing the following link again:
http://www2.lse.ac.uk/CPNSS/projects/VPP/Home.aspx.

>> In crude left/right terms <<

Is it fair to view political choice as a one dimensional left to
right line?

Reading these posts is making me lean towards voting yes to AV.
I suppose AV will lead to fewer small parties losing their deposits at elections, too?

>>I suppose AV will lead to fewer small parties losing their deposits
at elections, too?<<

If the threshold level remain the same for the two systems then yes,
as it is more likely that people will use their first choice to vote
for who they want, rather than voting tactically which tends to
squeeze out the smaller "parties" or independent candidates.

I shall be voting for AV because I am convinced by the arguments that
show AV to be fairer and more democratic than "FPTP" when there are
more than two valid candidates to choose from.

Single greatest argument for AV I have yet discovered.... Peter Stringfellow wants a No vote:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00gqswh



FB

Heard that as I was driving to Cockermouth today. Incredible.

Who decides the invites for these things?

"Guys, guys, I've got the famous political satirist Armando Iannucci to put the case for AV on today's programme. In the interests of fair play, balance and the BBC's famed impartiality, who should I invite to put the case against AV?"

Mind oyu they did have Kriss Akabusi on the other day putting the Yes case so they need to even things up!

BTW, I thought Stringfellow got to the crux of what the No campaign pretty damn well actually, it is all about trying to benefit the Tories.

FB

And you went to somewhere called Cockermouth?



FB

Did you hear Ed Milliband on R4 earlier though, admitting that when the Labour party were in power with a big majority they had absolutely no interest in electoral reform. But now they're out of the big seat ...

Yup. At least he admitted it. And of course the Labour party are not supporting this, we have official agnosticism with people free to campaign either way.

The principle argument for no seems to be though that it favours The tory and Labour party and allows them to take turns governing absolutly (even when most voters voted against them). That is why the Tories support it, and that is why Labour dinosaurs like Reid and Prescott support it.

FB

The latest indications (BBC radio 4) are that Tory supporters will
vote 90% for FPTP, Labour supporters will vote marginally in favour
of FPTP and that Liberal supporters are in hiding. On balance it
seems that there will be about a 65 % to 35 % split in favour of
FPTP and for everything to stay as it is. Anyway there's also
English local elections and Scottish Parliament, and Welsh and
Northern Irish Assembly elections.

I suppose if there is a clear NO for AV then there will be no
possibilities of UK Parliamentary reform in the near to medium
future. The next possibilities however will be referenda for
Scotland and Northern Ireland to break away from the Union.

I&#39;m not in hiding! I&#39;m just trying to drag myself from my sickbed to the polling station.

This post has been removed.