Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics
Original poster

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

476 replies

easternstar · 31/03/2011 23:33

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.

OP posts:
crazymum53 · 05/04/2011 20:27

I am voting YES. We live in a safe Labour seat where the sitting MP gets more than 50% of the vote in elections. So it really does feel that voting for any other party is irrelevant and a "wasted" vote.

catinthehat2 · 05/04/2011 20:32

"We live in a safe Labour seat where the sitting MP gets more than 50% of the vote in elections."

under AV, you will get exactly the same result

do not be under any illusions on this one

mumwithbumandtum · 05/04/2011 20:45

Only 3 countries in the world (that's right, the entire Planet) use AV and they are Australia, where voting is compulsory, Fiji and Papua New Guinea. The cost to each council would be £250m per election of implementing the software necessary for using AV. Guess who is selling the software and pushing the AV vote? The electoral Commission. Something smacks of dodgy dealings to me. Not saying FPTP is the best but it's a hell of a lot better than AV.

catinthehat2 · 05/04/2011 20:53

there's some intersting stuff out there as to which ex politicians have directorships in those software cos

pooka · 05/04/2011 20:56

I cannot get over the sheer cost of the system required to make the change over. It's not as if we're in boom town now.

The cost might be worth it if it were the system that was actually wanted by the lib dems i.e. PR. You could maybe argue that there was a mandate for the referendum. But since this is an unsatisfactory half-measure, even by Nick Clegg's reckoning....

Missingfriendsandsad · 05/04/2011 20:56

£250million = lie
it will cost no more than the referendum costs (which we are paying anyway)

implementation of software = lie
no software needed for a manual count you fool

electoral commission is a secret software vendor producing high security counting machines = lie
(do I really have to explain why that is BS??)

AV is only used by three countries? = lie

  • AV is the most popular electoral format in the world including for party leaders, union leaders the london mayoral elections. It is not used in many countries because of british colonialism and also because (as here) politicians with high vested interests in the current system block change (whilst still using the system for all their internal elections!! Hmm)

Is this what they call the 'little fluffy bunny rabbits in tutus' appeal????

claig · 05/04/2011 20:57

But the big parties are not really interested, they don't want us to have AV. They want us to keep FPTP. forever and ever and ever, so they will always be in power forever and ever and ever.

catinthehat2 · 05/04/2011 20:58

who benefits?
who is going to walk away with the cash for installing the software?
it's actually quite hard to find out, and I don't think you'll get the answer if you watch BBC News

catinthehat2 · 05/04/2011 20:58

"electoral commission is a secret software vendor producing high security counting machines"

eh - you made that one up, we all saw you

Missingfriendsandsad · 05/04/2011 21:01

read mumwithbumandtum - suddenly a conspiracy theorist with guff about 'software' being sold by the electoral commission has joined the thread - hope her NO hat is lined with silver foil so the aliens can't programme her brain Hmm

THERE IS NO SOFTWARE

catinthehat2 · 05/04/2011 21:03

actually, I don't think I have the strength to go over that post.
it just comes across as BS

honestly, people who use this site are in general pretty smart and don't buy the " you are all so thick not to swallow my stuff whole" business, it's tiresome now

so possibly time to give it a rest?

catinthehat2 · 05/04/2011 21:04

(OK can see the section now)

Missingfriendsandsad · 05/04/2011 21:05

some are not so smart as to not keep saying the same untrue things over and over again like parrots. if you don't get that there is no software by now then there is no hope for you.

pooka · 05/04/2011 21:51

Well I resent even the money spent on the referendum, so even it 'only' costing as much again is too much in my opinion. Wink

Missingfriendsandsad · 05/04/2011 21:54

oh for flips sake IT WON'T the budget for the next election IN TOTAL regardless of whether it is AV or not is £120 million....

AV won't cost any more!

pooka · 05/04/2011 22:03

82 million = cost of referendum
9 million = voter education should the system be adopted.

Well I'm pissed off about both those figures. Money that could be spent on something other than a flawed system (not saying FPTP is without its flaws, but admitting that does not make the AV proposal any more acceptable).

Missingfriendsandsad · 05/04/2011 22:19

er.. 15p per adult?

pooka · 05/04/2011 22:25

And? Is still money that could be spent elsewhere rather than on a system that even the political party who wanted electoral change as part of their electoral pledges don't really want.

I know is not massive amount of money in terms of national budgets. But as a governor of a local school that might be facing a deficit budget if not next year, then the year after, and someone who doesn't want AV, it is money that I resent being spent.

Missingfriendsandsad · 05/04/2011 22:29

You did read what I said didn't you - the budget for the election will be the same whatever the outcome - voter education is published ANYWAY for general elections.. The referendum is happening. Neither of the outcomes will change that, and I have already had my info from the electoral commission about that I can't see, based on my working for a count once, that there are any places for that extra cost....

-The info explaining AV has already been produced - no costs there
-Electoral info is distributed anyway - no cost there
-Ballot papers are the same - no cost there
-Counting staff are paid one payment for the full count irrespective of more rounds or recounts (as now) - no cost there

i'm pretty sure the £9million is not extra anyway..

pooka · 05/04/2011 22:34

Yes I read what you said.

I also read that the £9 million was extra, i.e. over and above the usual cost of running an election.

But anyway - to be frank it could cost 20p and I'd still see it as money wasted because I don't feel that the AV system is a significant improvement on FPTP.

Missingfriendsandsad · 05/04/2011 22:36

£9million sounds like a lot but shared amongst schools it would give you £450, but again I think this is the cost of the voter education on its own, that is INCLUDED in the election budget anyway - not extra to it.

Missingfriendsandsad · 05/04/2011 22:37

BTW your schools could save more than £450 by printing its brochures in black and white.

newwave · 05/04/2011 22:39

Pooka "it is money that I resent being spent".

I resent money being spent on security for the royal ponces wedding.

I resent monry being spent on the stupid NHS reforms (over one billion)

I resent any money being spent on nuclear weapons.

Sad to say we have to live with these things and the money being spent on AV is peanuts compared to my examples.

pooka · 05/04/2011 22:41

We already do. In addition to emailing all parent information, no more printed letters apart from on request.

pooka · 05/04/2011 22:43

I agree with all your examples too newwave. Grin

Particularly the royal wedding. Hmm

Swipe left for the next trending thread