The Alternative Vote (AV)

[HST Power]

It's the AV Referendum next month, and I'm curious to know what people think about it and how (if they do) intend to vote.

Personally, I think AV would be a big mistake, as it supposedly gives extreme parties like the BNP more preference and a better chance of winning the elections. But that's just my opinion!

What do you think?

 

[Zoe]

it supposedly gives extreme parties like the BNP more preference and a better chance of winning the elections.

The extreme parties like the BNP will likely be eliminated in the early rounds of voting under the AV system so have very little chance of winning a seat in a single member constituency.

 

[HST Power]

The extreme parties like the BNP will likely be eliminated in the early rounds of voting under the AV system so have very little chance of winning a seat in a single member constituency.

But according to what I know, if you go into the ballot room and tick for the Conservatives or Labour, someone who votes for the BNP would have their vote counted multiple times. If you come third in an election, you can effectively be the winner, due to the strange ways in which AV pulls the strings.

 

[BlythPower]

A vote might be physically counted several times but would ultimately end up being just a single vote for a single candidate. Also, you don't have to rank all the candidates if you don't want to, just the ones (or even just a single one) you prefer.

 

[Zoe]

But according to what I know, if you go into the ballot room and tick for the Conservatives or Labour, someone who votes for the BNP would have their vote counted multiple times.

If the BNP has the least votes after the first round then they would be eliminated, there is no way they can win the seat once eliminated. Any second preference votes would go to the parties still in, not the BNP.

 

[gordonthemoron]

BNP have come out in favour of FPTP and against AV

 

[ainsworth74]

This thread could probably do with a poll along the lines of Yes/No/Not voting, just a thought.

As for the actual referendum I shall be voting no to changing the voting system to AV. I don't particularly like FPTP but it's still better than AV. Personally I would rather something along the lines of Proportional Representation.

 

[HST Power]

I'd add one if I knew how!

 

[ainsworth74]

Well I'm sure a friendly moderator will add one if you can't work it out *hint hint*

 

[Jordy]

Done

 

[HST Power]

Done

Cheers! Looks like 'No' is the most popular so far!

 

[thefab444]

As for the actual referendum I shall be voting no to changing the voting system to AV. I don't particularly like FPTP but it's still better than AV. Personally I would rather something along the lines of Proportional Representation.

Surely, if you want PR then you should vote for AV purely to show that there is the appetite for electoral reform. That's what many people are doing.

 

[Aictos]

But according to what I know, if you go into the ballot room and tick for the Conservatives or Labour, someone who votes for the BNP would have their vote counted multiple times. If you come third in an election, you can effectively be the winner, due to the strange ways in which AV pulls the strings.

Why would someone have their vote for the BNP counted multiple times, that sounds like scaremongering to me - actually isn't that election fraud what you're suggesting?

I support AV as it's used very successfully in other elections such as union/work elections where I can vote in order who exactly I want to vote for and that's better then the current system.

For example, at the last general election I could have voted in 1st place for Conservatives, voted in 2nd place for English Independents and finally voted in 3rd place for UKIP, if I did vote for BNP if they then did not get enough votes then they would be out of the election and there wouldn't be any need for someone to count the same vote multiple times which ought to lead to civil action being taken.

 

[jamesontheroad]

But according to what I know, if you go into the ballot room and tick for the Conservatives or Labour, someone who votes for the BNP would have their vote counted multiple times. If you come third in an election, you can effectively be the winner, due to the strange ways in which AV pulls the strings.

Put it this way. Someone asks you to buy a bag of crisps. They give you 50p and their first, second and third choice. They don't give you £1.50.

It's a pernicious lie from the No2AV camp that AV gives some people more votes than others. FPTP places incredible imbalances of weight on some constituencies as opposed to others.

AV has been working just fine in Northern Ireland for a number of years. If applied in the UK, it would revolutionise politics. I would finally live in a constituency where I could vote with my heart and it would count. Every election I've voted in has been a 'safe' win for a party I haven't supported, so my vote has been "wasted".

Besides. a form of AV has been the system of choice for both the Labour and Conservative parties to elect their leaders. If the Conservatives had used FPTP to elect their current leader, David Davies would have won despite securing a smaller percentage of the votes than David Cameron

 

[Zoe]

The difference with the Tory party leadership elections though is that the MPs can only vote for one candidate in each round. Tactical voting was used last time first to eliminated Ken Clarke and later to eliminate Liam Fox. The elecotrate was also different for the final round with all the party members voting and not just the MPs. It may have been different if Cameron had been up against Clarke or Fox in the final round.

 

[gordonthemoron]

BNP are not in favour of AV because hell would freeze over before they got a 50% approval rating (and be elected)

 

[Ivo]

I'm really not sure about the AV. Taking the BNP argument, I fear about a few places around the country, such as Dagenham, where people live on the doorstep of "non-British" people and get fed up of it. They might then vote for (for sake of argument) Labour, but then choose Griffin and co. second. If everyone voted for a different first choice, but all chose the fascists second, would that play into the BNP's hands?

I think the system works well enough as it is. If such a system can work well in the States, why can't it here? Or do we need to employ a truly US-inspired system of allocating each part of the country (based on ceremonial counties, or regions, or something like that) and allocate points based on population? Or would London [residents, not MPs] have too great a say in the country's politics that way...?

 

[Seacook]

I will be voting in favour of AV. It is a step in the direction of fairer and more representative government.

The efforts of the No campaigners seem to be getting more and more desperate. The assertion that fringe party supporters will somehow get more votes than supporters of mainstream parties is simply drivel - when the fringe party candidate is eliminated the votes are redistributed for the next round but ALL of the votes cast still count -your vote does not go away simply because a lot of people agree with you! And as for those who believe that BNP might stand more chance using AV than with FPTP think again. It is theoretically possible to win under FPTP with no more than 26% of the votes cast (assuming the three main parties split the rest of the vote between them); under AV the winner has to convince more than half of the electorate. AV makes it possible to vote against a candidate by ranking every other one above them - this alone will decrease any chance of an extremist getting in.

The claim that a third place candidate on the first roubd can come through to win a seat is true, but the chances of it happening are remote bearing in mind that the total of votes for each candidate cannot go down - the three leaders would need to be quite close in order for an "upset" to take place. This reveals the weaknesses of FPTP - how can a candidate be elected when the majority of the voters are opposed?


========
Something else has just occurred to me while I was typing the last paragraph. Under the proposed system, and unlike in Australia, you are not obliged to place a preference against every candidate's name, so if you prefer FPTP you will be able to vote for your candidate and no other; the only situation where this does not achieve the same result from your poiint of view is if the person you voted for is in first place after the first round but with less than 50% and is subsequently overtaken by a more popular candidate. Vox populi vox dei. But at least the whole process is transparent. Under FPTP there is no way of knowing whether AV methods would have affected the result.

 

[HST Power]

There are some very interesting points in this thread. I'm starting to wonder who the next election would shape up if we had AV.

 

[Ivo]

I just had the local Conservative candidate knock on the front door! That came as a surprise.

Bad news for all of you Labour lovers out there: Someone is seriously considering joining a certain blue group.

 

[Dai.]

I honestly doubt that the BNP would get past the first round using the AV system. But I'm going to go with the AV because it sounds like a good alternative.

 

[Oswyntail]

Really, I cannot get worked up about AV. It would make tiddly squit difference to the results of recent elections (so far as anyone can tell) and is, IMHO, a fairly meaningless sop to "modernisers".
With or without AV, we will still have a system that actively prevents constituents views from being represented. An MP is elected, but then is expected to vote, in the main, along party lines in Parliament. Why should an MP with a majority of 1 vote in the same way as one with a majority of 10,000? But I, as a constituent, may agree with the Conservatives in some areas, Libdems in others, and Greens in yet others. Who is representing me? I suspect that most are like me, except for the diehards who vote Labour/Conservative simply for the name, with no thought for actual policies and effects. The real change that is needed is to abolish the party whips in Parliament, make every vote a free vote, and encourage meaningful debate and representation. The Prime Minister could even be elected not as a party leader, but as the member who could command most support in the house; ministers could be selected on ability, not just who is available from one party. IMHO, the current coalition is a step in that direction, and I wish more people could get behind it and see how co-operation works out.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I just had the local Conservative candidate knock on the front door! That came as a surprise.

Bad news for all of you Labour lovers out there: Someone is seriously considering joining a certain blue group.

You won't be the only one on here. A certain admin whose name begins with 'M' and ends in '-ojo' is a Tory Party member too I believe.

 

[HST Power]

You won't be the only one on here. A certain admin whose name begins with 'M' and ends in '-ojo' is a Tory Party member too I believe.

You may know this already, but I am in fact a Conservative employee. It's very nice to see I'm not the only Tory on the forum! Go on Ivo, join!

 

[Ivo]

You won't be the only one on here. A certain admin whose name begins with 'M' and ends in '-ojo' is a Tory Party member too I believe.

I knew that already Do you think Old Timer might be as well? I think you would make a decent candidate too (when you're old enough of course!).

You may know this already, but I am in fact a Conservative employee. It's very nice to see I'm not the only Tory on the forum! Go on Ivo, join!

I have to admit that I didn't. But it's something I've been looking at doing for a while, and seen as Ms Dodgson came and knocked I thought it was a good chance to ask about it! And maybe in the long run I could become the Transport Minister (or whatever it is called at local level) for Bath/Southend? That would show them a thing or two...!

 

[krus_aragon]

I'm undecided, but leaning toward voting in favour of AV. I've yet to hear a good argument from the no camp, and if they don't persuade me, then I'm going for the affirmative.

Incidentally, I have experience in running elections under Single Transferrable Vote (STV) at Students' Union, which when you're only electing one individual at a time is equivalent to AV.

I echo the comments above with regards to 'triple voting' for minority parties. The only way you could 'vote three times' for the BNP is if two other candidates each poll less than the BNP candidate, and are eliminated. Yet, in fact, you're still using just the one vote: it's just that in three consecutive rounds your first (for instance) choice is still in the running. The victorious candidate in an eight horse race could have to survive seven rounds of eliminations. That candidate would still have to get 50% of the eligible votes, no matter how many rounds it takes.

Note that in an STV/AV election, if you only give a preference to some of the candidates, and all your preferences are eliminated, then that vote no longer counts toward the 50% calculation. Otherwise you could end up in a situation where so many people's preferences have all been eliminated that it's impossible for anyone to get 50%. Don't want your (expired) vote discarded like this? If you'd prefer anyone other than candidate X to get in, then rank everyone else above candidate X!

 

[HST Power]

I'm undecided, but leaning toward voting in favour of AV. I've yet to hear a good argument from the no camp, and if they don't persuade me, then I'm going for the affirmative.

Here's the no side of the argument.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAWmKgIOqv8

I knew that already Do you think Old Timer might be as well? I think you would make a decent candidate too (when you're old enough of course!).

I have to admit that I didn't. But it's something I've been looking at doing for a while, and seen as Ms Dodgson came and knocked I thought it was a good chance to ask about it! And maybe in the long run I could become the Transport Minister (or whatever it is called at local level) for Bath/Southend? That would show them a thing or two...!

I'm pretty sure Old Timer is, but I don't really know him well. I'm just basing that on things he's written in my thread about the coalition.

I'm not an MP myself yet, but it's something I want to do, and I've been told it's something that I certainly should do. I currently work as an MP's advisor.
If you get into politics now and set the wheels in motion for your campaign, then Transport Minister should be within your grasp!

I hope you decide to join the Party! Good luck!

 

[Ivo]

I'm undecided, but leaning toward voting in favour of AV. I've yet to hear a good argument from the no camp, and if they don't persuade me, then I'm going for the affirmative.

I think this is rather persuasive personally. The bit with the school sums it up pretty well. And if you don't like Tory stuff, too bad really. No to AV

As I said, I'm undecided (and probably not going to vote on the AV campaign anyway), but heavily leaning in favour of No.

First Past the Post works almost everywhere. Why can't it here?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Me senses a pro-Tory thread on the horizon!

 

[starrymarkb]

I'm saying yes as a first step to PR

 

[BlythPower]

Y'know when I read Ivo's first post in this thread I thought "Ooh I bet it was a girly knocking on his door". Lo and behold...

I have to admit that I didn't. But it's something I've been looking at doing for a while, and seen as Ms Dodgson came and knocked I thought it was a good chance to ask about it! And maybe in the long run I could become the Transport Minister (or whatever it is called at local level) for Bath/Southend? That would show them a thing or two...!

BTW: There's a suspicion of UKIP about OT if you ask me...