Forum

Yes to AV without a shadow of a doubt. Some of the anti AV stuff should be labelled propaganda its absolutely brilliant.

I’d agree with you on how silly the leaflets are. I just binned the poorly made red thing in the bin after the first page (and I read through the liberal democrat manifesto)

However, things I have found interesting.

The showing of the parties’ true colours in encouraging people to vote yes or no. Clegg, Cameron and the BNP looked especially uneasy when they were doing their AV routines

How it could endanger the coalition, as it is a serious matter in which they have differences of opinions. Previously this would have given them a mishmash result, but it’s the publics vote this time.

Will try to play DA or stupid American from now on

Quoted from Squeak

If I was old enough to vote I would vote no. I fear that AV would increase coalitions and therefore take away our political stability from the last 200 years. The UK would never progress greatly due to bills being an absolute bitch to get through. Why would I want somebody in 4th place run government as well?

I’m content with FPTP, yeah its not perfect but nothing is. We need another voting election system preferably some other PR system but I don’t think AV is suited currently.

Quoted from paperback article linked in OP

“David Cameron said in his No2AV speech that AV would mean hung parliaments would become “more commonplace”, with all the horsetrading which that implies. Leaving aside whether coalitions are a good or bad thing, AV won’t lead to more hung parliaments
necessarily. There have been fewer hung parliaments  in Australia, which uses AV, then in Britain, which uses FPTP. There’s simply no evidence to support Cameron’s claim.

Also, as this IPPR Report “Worst of Both Worlds: Why First Past the Post No Longer Works” makes clear, hung parliaments are equally likely under First Past the Post anyway. That’s primarily because more and more people have started voting for parties other than Labour or Conservative, as this chart makes clear: (can’t do on

The report concludes:

Since the 1970s, UK citizens have shown a clear appetite to vote for third parties and to embrace a form of political pluralism which runs directly against the grain of the way FPTP operates. It is breaking down in a new context of multi-party politics. Designed for a world that no longer exists, it looks increasingly anachronistic in 21 st century Britain. Electoral
trends since the 1970s are eroding FPTP’s ability to do what its advocates claim it does. As a result, unless it is reformed we can expect at least some of the following to happen, all of which profoundly undermine the case for its retention. (p21)

In other words, our current system is broken. AV would be a small but significant step towards fixing that system.”

Quoted from Chaplain

[…] There have been fewer hung parliaments  in Australia, which uses AV, then in Britain,

Britain also has 40 million people more than Australia and is more diverse in terms of demographics the countries in terms of their electorate are simply not comparable. Its easier to spilt 28 million votes than it is 12

Quoted from Squeak

I fear that AV would increase coalitions and therefore take away our political stability from the last 200 years.

AHAHA. Sorry i better actually explain that.

Did you know, in the last 100 years, Britain has actually had several coalitions under FPTP? Did you know there was 5 hung parliaments between 1910 and 1928? Did you also know there was a coalition during WWI, WWII, today’s economic crisis, gvts extended the right to vote *and* started the foundations for the welfare state? Political instability, eh? The idea of permanent coalitions was clearly common here if there were so many in such a short period of time. That causes great instability. Much like the weak government we have today, failing to do anything about the deficit. I see no strong action at all!

Oh, this also assumes there’d be more coalitions. See the ippr report http://www.ippr.org/members/download.asp?f=%2Fecomm%2Ffiles%2FRightAlternative-AssessingAV_Apr2011.pdf on this (the same information is also given in the PSA report). No more hung parliaments between 1983-2010? Interesting. Almost like the entire premise of your argument entirely collapses.

I’m not going to be naive; of course, in the future with a large 3rd party AV may well lead to the occasional hung parliament more often than under FPTP. But one or two every now and then is hardly going to destroy the democratic process – our political system can cope as said with the 1910-28 period.

Also, gg man, demographics are for sure different. But how exactly does it make the political process different? You may well have a good argument, but I could easily say that AV would make more sense with UK demographics. I haven’t backed that up, but neither have you – please explain more fully.

Edit: oh, and when will someone who came in 4th govern? The parties competing in 4th hardly have anywhere near the amount of MPs of the main 3, hardly likely they’ll be part of it.

Yes to AV only because it may potentially lead to PR. Voting No seems like it will close that door forever.

The old system is fine and the new one offers no benefit great enough to warrant such a change

i also hate socialists and communists so its natural to hate the latest thing they support