Alternative Vote Referendum - May 5th 2011

pingwing said:
The reason the parties are divided on this (main stream ones) are because of what they will/wont gain from it.

Lib Dems will win more seats in theory from it

Labour want PR in parliament and see this as a side distraction (fair point but pr is a ball ache anyway)

Conservatives will loose several safe seats, St Albans being a primary example (where I am now) as the local Tory seat is able to hold out against a divided Labour Lib Dem vote.

The fringe parties either want to keep what we have now so come their Reich they can abuse it or want PR to get silly top up seats or something.
Click to expand...

Labour absolutely do not want PR, they are the ones who benefit most from the current system, remember that Labour got a lower percentage of the vote in 2005 than Cameron did last year, and they also got a lower percentage last year than Major did in 1997.

Why do you think Labour are so against fixing the constituencies to eliminate the current significant labour bias?
 
I'm 18, and I will be voting AV.

Why? I don't think where you live in the country should prevent your candidate from getting a vote. My constituency is a safe Tory seat and I have very little voting power in elections. For these reasons, I don't think FPTP is a fair, democratic voting system and voting for AV is a step closer to STV, which I support.
 
Dolph said:
Labour absolutely do not want PR, they are the ones who benefit most from the current system, remember that Labour got a lower percentage of the vote in 2005 than Cameron did last year, and they also got a lower percentage last year than Major did in 1997.

Why do you think Labour are so against fixing the constituencies to eliminate the current significant labour bias?
Click to expand...

Oh I need to make my Labour comment clearer. Labour as a party as a whole 'officially' like the current set up as they are an established party. But when Lord Kinnock was still an MP he introduced a private members bill to change the UK to a Republic and introduce PR into parliament.

Anyway my real point is this is an issue that Labour look like they have a finger in both pies (which I didnt elaborate on in the previous post for simplicity as AV related issues needed addressing). On the one hand Labour stand to loose a fair bit from their own safe seats changing the system, but on the other they can gain from the Tories (the biggest foe).

Iv managed to get confused with political history a little, Lib dems = WE WANT PR NOW, Labour = want change, want to spend a lot of time working out the best way (potentially PR). I think that's the best explanation for what I was going for
 
I'm voting AV because it is fairer plane and simple. Also the taxpayers alliance claptrap about "we need body armour not a change in voting system" deeply offended me.
 
I have spent months pondering this. I am 80% no right now.

AV is, on paper, a more democratic electoral system. It isn't great but it isn't terrible and is an improvement when it comes to reflecting the wishes of people.

However, I think all this extra lovely democracy is COMPLETELY negated by the fact we are going to end up with fewer majority governments, and what I think is wholly undemocratic is the kind of shenanigans we see in Australia, Germany and even here in the UK, where the big parties make gigantic and completely disproportionate concessions to very minor parties with just a few seats in order to prop up coalitions (ie the Greens in Germany).

FPTP is the least of two evils.
 
Last edited:
I am undecided on how to vote, I am concerned that it doesn't go far enough.

Even though I disagree with some minority parties views, if they polled 2% of the vote surely they should get 2% of the seats, AV still doesn't enable this.
 
I think despite its flaws (i.e. not being PR), AV is still better than FPTP because despite the Lib Dems attempts to commit electoral hari-kiri, chances are that a hung Parliament is going to happen more often than not now with the current political make-up of the UK. At the very least, AV gives you a very good idea about what the coalition should be made up of rather than it being a result of political party horse-trading.

I also think AV is a big threat to the 'traditional' big party system and would lead to more choice at the ballot box which can only be a good thing. Although it probably wouldn't make much difference the first time round, the subsequent vote made in the knowledge of your constituency's prior preferences could make a huge difference to the make-up of Parliament.

Hatter The Mad said:
FPTP is the least of two evils.
Click to expand...
You could have saved yourself a few paragraphs and just said 'O HAI I"M A TORY' :p

Also having seen the ridiculously antagonistic US political 'system' at work over here, anything that hastens the move towards political co-operation and ideological flexibility between multiple parties should be heartily endorsed at every opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Ekim said:
I am not 100% sure, but I think Barking is where the BNP got their highest percentage in a constituency at the last election.

Using AV it wouldn't have even got past the first round of voting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/a11.stm

Labour would still hold the seat.
Click to expand...

How can anyone know that, since no second options were ticked? This is the same point as mentioned by Westyfield2 earlier in the thread. You can apply the AV system to the first vote I guess, but you can't actually say what would have happened in a full AV system.

Someone correct this if it is flawed but that was my understanding.
 
I'm voting Yes but I'd be very surprised if AV gets a majority vote in favour from the British public.

Most seem to hate change, even if it's for the better :p
 
[TW]Fox;18794235 said:
If the BNP stand to to gain so much, why are they supporting the 'No' vote?
Click to expand...

Maybe this is crediting the BNP with too much savvy but perhaps it's an elaborate double-bluff - knowing that more people will vote against them than for them if they'd come out and said "we love AV" then that would cause a number of people to vote no on principle but by stating "we're for FPTP" it might tempt a few to vote the other way... ;)

JHeaton said:
Hm, it's a shame that we can't have a mock election using the AV system to see how things might unfold, really.
Click to expand...

It might be a bit like player poker for matchsticks, few people take it seriously unless there's something riding on it so you might get an idea but it is quite possibly a misleading one.
 
semi-pro waster said:
Maybe this is crediting the BNP with too much savvy but perhaps it's an elaborate double-bluff - knowing that more people will vote against them than for them if they'd come out and said "we love AV" then that would cause a number of people to vote no on principle but by stating "we're for FPTP" it might tempt a few to vote the other way... ;)
Click to expand...
Same thought had occurred to me as well really, even though their first preference share might increase there is no realistic chance of them currently taking any seats. By standing behind FPTP they can continue with their rhetoric of "British traditions", they'll focus on particular areas and perhaps increase their council seats.
 
semi-pro waster said:
It might be a bit like player poker for matchsticks, few people take it seriously unless there's something riding on it so you might get an idea but it is quite possibly a misleading one.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, yeah. One of my major concerns at the moment is what happens if we don't like it and want to revert to FPTP? I imagine the answer is very much "you voted for it, you're stuck with it" which obviously means that any decision needs to be well thought out, but how many people are actually going to consider it instead of just marking the first box they see? :/
 
I'm not sure which way to vote, it seems that AV in my current seat would be a good thing as it would mean a Conservative vote is no longer a wasted vote which would probably effect the overall balance of the vote but almost certainly not the final outcome, it would however stop people voting LibDem as a first choice just to keep the labour candidate out.

Sadly at the same time AV seems to complicate the voting process and is our totally disinterested public ready to seriously think about the outcome of ticking three different boxes, I doubt it!

I think come vote day we will see a pitfull turn out below 50% and a small majority in foavour of AV which will be a damning statement about our leading politicians ability to engage with the electorate on such an important issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom