Poll: F.P.T.P or A.V.. This Thursday

FPTP or AV

  • FPTP

    Votes: 319 37.1%

  • AV

    Votes: 359 41.8%

  • Pfft, Will Still End Up Run By Crooks

    Votes: 181 21.1%
  • Total voters
    859
Me and my family was discussing this earlier and we all decided that AV was a step forward compared to the system thats in place at the moment as there are just too much party politics and back dealings to really vote confidently for 1 specific party. It is like being stuck between a rock and a hard place though when it comes to choosing as both systems have pros and cons which rival each other.
 
Voting AV, not my preferred system but it is a stepping stone to a better system (AV+). I think the constituency link is important so don't favour pure PR, instead would prefer either STV or AV+. AV+ is more easily understood.

The debate and talking points on both sides have been awful this one person one vote is just as much rubbish as ending jobs for life.

The best explanation of AV i've seen "Is your Cat confused about the referendum on the voting system on the 5th May?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiHuiDD_oTk
 
There's no one voting system which is 100% fair in every case - that being said, AV seems a damn sight better than FPTP, so that's what I'll be voting for. If it sets the precedent for more change then all the better.
 
Castiel said:
It is just as likely that voting for AV will just as effectively kill any further debate for PR.

In fact it is more likely that those pushing for reform will gain momentum if the AV yes vote fails as more people look into PR and other reforms in the constituency and parliamentary arenas also.
Click to expand...

To your first part, why would it? The Lib Dems want a proportional system and AV isn't it, if they gain more seats they have a bigger voice and more power.

To your 2nd, this is about the political will to change the system, something that is lacking. Just like Turkeys aren't going to vote for Xmas nor are the Conservatives or Labour going to go for a voting system which will savagely cut their power, especially if they've already won a vote that says people want FPTP. As I mentioned, Canada from a few years ago is a good example of where we are now and what will happen if this vote goes to FPTP.
 
bam0 said:
To your first part, why would it? The Lib Dems want a proportional system and AV isn't it, if they gain more seats they have a bigger voice and more power.
Click to expand...

IF they gain more seats, they could also be wiped out. It is unlikely that they will get a "bigger voice" than they currently have in coalition, so saying that AV would increase calls for reform by increasing the Lib Dem's ability to influence doesn't hold water.

Voting for AV doesn't mean the PR debate will be stronger, quite the opposite in fact as many people asking for electoral change will be satisfied with AV and those that still campaign will simply be sidelined by "We have already changed the system".

In fact in Fiji there are moves to return to a FPTP system and in Australia the reform lobby are also campaigning to return to a FPTP system.

Neither seems to be indicative of the "stepping stone to PR" that you seem to think is automatic, quite the opposite in fact.

Also in Australia, AV has created what is effectively a two party democracy and that's not something I would like to see.

bam0 said:
To your 2nd, this is about the political will to change the system, something that is lacking. Just like Turkeys aren't going to vote for Xmas nor are the Conservatives or Labour going to go for a voting system which will savagely cut their power, especially if they've already won a vote that says people want FPTP. As I mentioned, Canada from a few years ago is a good example of where we are now and what will happen if this vote goes to FPTP.
Click to expand...

Voting No to AV doesn't mean Yes to FPTP, it simply means AV is not what people want, it doesn't impact on the need for electoral reform, in fact a No vote will not silence reformers and will more than likely increase their numbers as this referendum has increased awareness to the issues our electoral system has.

I find it ironic that most of those that say "Vote for AV" don't actually want AV.

Whichever way you vote, Parliament will see that as a vindication of that system, only with the No vote we have had no change and so the same argument from the reformers remain and probably increased by more awareness of the issues with FPTP and in all likelihood we will see MPs backing more substantial reforms to the Constituency and Parliamentary systems and in turn revisiting the voting system. Voting Yes to AV simply vindicates AV as the change reformers are calling for, thus undermining their own campaign for PR.

A nice catch 22 situation, only with the No vote, there is no change and the issues that led to one referendum remain as will the legitimacy of those that lobby for change.
 
Last edited:
paradigm said:
Well yes, with AV you DO get a 2nd vote (of sorts). Being able to stipulate your 2nd preference is a 2nd vote, and so on.
Click to expand...
No, being able to stipulate your 2nd preference is a 2nd preference, not a 2nd vote. To claim that under AV it's one person, multiple votes, is just the same rubbish spin as me saying FPTP; Lots of people, no votes. Everybody has one vote in both cases and the systems are just different.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
I don't see how that's any different.
Click to expand...
It can be if somebody's first preference is eliminated and they didn't have any second preferences. In reality it just means there vote isn't transferred rather than not counted, as it's counted for a candidate that didn't win so has no effect on the outcome, and so in that regard it works just like FPTP.
 
FPTP for me although frankly neither is what I want, I just don't see a significant enough benefit to the change to make it worthwhile hence I'll stick with what we've got. Either way it looks as if this will be used to state it's what the people want and that is how it will remain for a while so it's a bit of a no win situation - what we've got which doesn't properly represent people or a dirty little compromise which doesn't properly represent people.
 
If i can't get a coke, i will settle for a pepsi. If i can't get a pepsi i will settle for asda own brand. Under FPTP If i wanted a coke and got given Asda own brand i would be like 'erm wheres my pepsi? Who magically decided asda own was a fitting replacement?'
 
Castiel said:
Voting for AV doesn't mean the PR debate will be stronger, quite the opposite in fact as many people asking for electoral change will be satisfied with AV and those that still campaign will simply be sidelined by "We have already changed the system".
Click to expand...
I think you are wrong to claim that the PR debate is weakened by the AV change. In fact, for those supporting the implementation of the recommendations in the Jenkins Commission, it is very much a stepping stone, with AV for constituency elections being a fundamental part of it. You can add party lists to AV to arrive at the conclusions in the report. While it isn't pure PR, it is a pretty decent system that doesn't do a bad job of ticking all of the British political boxes. It's probably one of the better options we have.
Castiel said:
Whichever way you vote, Parliament will see that as a vindication of that system
Click to expand...
In reality, not at all. If Parliament were to close its doors and all media and public interest in politics were to end, maybe. Otherwise, we can be sure that Parliament is not deaf.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom