so are you going to bother to vote on the electoral reform referendum?

[easternstar]

Or not?

To be honest I don't think either AV or first past the post is the best method.

When I did my government and politics A-level donkey's years ago I always thought that the fairest method was to have larger constituencies and make up the difference with a party list system based on percentages.

HHKimbo, actually I think they are linked - if a system makes a particular result more likely then the implications of that have to be examined. And AV makes coalition a much more likely prospect. If parties simply junk their election pledges as part of a coalition, then the electorate has no say. Therefore without the safeguards I outlined, I would vote for a system that makes coalition less likely.

AV doesn't guarante the winner will have the support of over 50% of the vote - as you may want to vote 'none of the above', implying you don't support ANY of the candidates but this option does not exist. It would only be 50% of people who support at least 1 of the candidates.

twit "how else do I say I want something better than what we have? Genuine question? Maybe I shouldn't bother, as you so nicely suggested?"

I did not say you should not bother, i said at the ballot you should answer the question you are asked rather than a different one.

If you feel robbed of your choices you should have participated in more direct politics (from approaching MP, who still represents you despite what you think about him/her, to forming/joining pressure groups and pressing for change). Nobody will hear what you think by means of telepathy.

Don't be cross with me, what I said before was not directed at you personally (but I do think people should cast their vote in a responsible way).

Ok, well it came across as people like me shouldn't be allowed to vote, which is .
I have an opinion on the leaders yes, but to be honest I am not wishing to use this as an opprtunity to get at either of them - I agree that it is more important than they are, and probably longer lasting. I'm just pissed off that at the moment I pretty much don't have a vote (even though I do vote) and that is something I would like to change.
Before reading this thread and it's various links and looking around other sources (limited) I blithely thought ANY change was better than none - not so now but neither am I going to change my vote. I am more informed but as yet unswayed. And yes, I will wonder whether I did right, but only time can tell us that I suppose.
You're right, I should make more noise through letters and e-mails - but would this actually do anything either? It just seems as though the whole system is geared to please those in it rather than those it should be serving.

In case it isn't blindingly obvious I'm new to the politics threads, so I may not be getting what I want to say across as succinctly as others, but hey, we've all got to start somewhere.

Oh for cripes sake (I think we need bigger capitals for the permanently dumb....)

1. AV DOES NOT MAKE COALITIONS MORE LIKELY.

1. FIRST PAST THE POST IS NO SAFEGUARD AGAINST COALITION --

CAN'T YOU SEE THE HUGE GIANT CAMERON-SHAPED EXAMPLE STARING YOU IN THE SODDING FACE???!!!!

"Oh for cripes sake (I think we need bigger capitals for the permanently dumb....)"

Oh dear

Sooty says "you lose"

Giddy

You must be kernackered.

vote of thanks for the rational knowledgeable reasoned etc etc commentary throughout

Re: Sooty says! Is that you bringing your glove puppet to political debates again [crying shame emoticon].

Why gidy do you say 'people will put third choices for candidates they don't want' then also claim that people put on choice only (in a system that has compulsory preferences .

If you do that in Oz it is a spoilt ballot. If you do it here you are either confident your party will stay in until the last round or a first past the post at all costs person, or someone who thinks their first choice has no alternative. All of which are fine to me - the voters should have choice as to how they vote. Under first past the post they have 'vote or don't' as the only choice under AV they can behave in a first past the post way or a preferential way IT IS THEIR CHOICE.

yes

and it will be no

AV is the wrong system

NOOOO AV v PR...

AV means that there is a constituency link AND a method to produce an overall government AS WELL AS more representative voting. PR produces a representative parliament but a weak mandate to govern cf: Belgium, First past the post produces a strong mandate to govern, but poor representation of constituents who do not hold the same views as their elected MP. AV moves the process towards the middle - more constituency views are catered for and yet there is still a strong mandate to govern.

(thanks to the independent and the electoral commission for the reading I did yesterday about this!)

Good point GiddyPickle, AV may not lead to a better PR system. I have a hunch that it will. Even Portillo was saying after the election that we need a change in the voting system, because it wasn't fair. It isn't fair to the LibDems and smaller parties and it is not fair to the people. Portillo recognised it. There is a danger of elections becoming a farce and more and more people feeling disenfranchised. Something has to change to reinvigorate the system and give the people a voice and to give the government a real mandate. I don't mind coalitions, they are about compromise and reflect more of the public's view than a FPTP elected government elected by a minority of the voters. I think all teh bigwigs will get together and devise a fairer PR system eventually, not because they care about the public, but in order to strengthen their mandate.

"You are quite right - under the AV proposed for us, we can still all vote exactly like it's FPTP (1st choice only and no other choice). "

and surely to goodness this is the intention?

once people get that AV (as framed) is going to give pretty much the same outcome as FPTP, will it then sink in that this is a pretend choice designed to guarantee permanent power for the same corrupt political class (from Kenneth Clarke and John Gummer to Ed Miliband and Keith Vaz to Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne)?

Portillo? not a mover & shaker any more I'm afraid

who cares what he thinks?

get this:

AV will NOT lead to PR
there will be no more referenda on the subject
this is your lot. don't kid yourself
(it's a sham folks if you haven't got that already)

to think people died to get the vote and you have some twonk calling everything a sham and a waste of time and a country full of twonks who don't bother voting because they can't be arsed.

I think Portillo still has lots of contacts high up in politics. I am sure he is not the only one who thinks like that. So you want to keep the current system which doesn't allow the LibDems a fair representation based on the numbers who vote for them? If that is not a sham, what is? AV is not perfect but it is a start and no worse than the current sham.

AV is an improvement to the current system.

It means MPs must have support from the majority of voters.

This is fairer, more democratic, and will make MPs work harder and better because they will need YOUR vote.

At the moment MPs can get into parliament when 71% of people have voted against them! AV will correct this and they will need the support of most of the voters.

I understand your frustration missingf

"AV is not perfect but it is a start "

you really don't get it do you.
it is not a start, that is it, the end until you or I are dead and probably a great deal longer

I don't get it. It's flaws will become apparent. The Guardianistas will write articles about the flaws. The bigwigs listen to the BBC and the Guardianistas. New people like Roy Jenkins will emerge and Miliband will also join in and all the left will say we need a new system, and Jon Snow will discuss it and crowds for hire will be hired and they will be dressed in purple and they will have all their paid for banners and the din will get louder and teh bigwigs will say we have to compromise, let's create a slightly fairer PR system. And bit by bit we will get a fairer system.

nah

that's not how it actually works IRL

for Giddy.

"PR isn't an option so AV is a change from one unfair system to a more complex but also unfair system." Just about sums it up!

(Claig, current lot in power are more likely to listen to the Times, Telegraph and the Mail, tbh.)

I'm voting in the Scottish elections on 5 May.

That's it.