Yes or No -AV referendum May 2011

[articul8]

I don't think even the most obsessed electoral reformer would say this is as big an issue as the cuts etc - but still, we finally have a chance to move on from the FPTP system that works to exclude the emergence of new forces to challenge the two (or two-and-a-bit) party system.

Few people think AV is the best alternative. But it's likely to be the only one on offer. It means that people can vote for a green or left/independent candidate without that meaning their vote is "wasted" and won't help to keep out the Tory (or Tory/Lib).

Let's 'AV it?

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

And yet it means the "green, left or independent" candidate is no more likely to get elected than under the current system, if anything they will be less likely to get in given the way it favours the really big parties.

If I bothered voting in this referendum I would probably vote no.

 

[articul8]

need to be careful not to assume people would vote the same way under a new system - in any case change has its own dynamic and the big parties aren't necessarily in control eg. once you've moved to preference voting for national elections the logic suggests adopting it for locals in England and Wales where there is already multi-member seats (NI and Scots already have this) - this means PR would be in across the board at local council level and offers increased opps for the left.

A vote for the status quo is a vote of approval for the party politics we have now.

 

[past caring]

So is a vote for AV.

 

[sihhi]

Boycott any such referendum.

There are more and more arenas of democratic participation :- area assemblies, local regeneration board elections, mayoral elections, assembly elections, community policing boards, local mayoral elections...

This legalistic struggle - beloved of greens and liberals - is a dead end.

AV is another long process for soft liberals and no doubt some socialists to argue over, but it's completely hollow. As is full PR.

Win and the implementation takes 10 years, efforts for economic democracy are sidelined into 'wait until you have better political democracy, you will be happy then', when AV fails to deliver what people want 'oh, the old system was better, damn the Independent readers for undermining the traditional british way of doing things, let's go back to the old way'.
Lose and it's a case of 'democracy is how you wish it, be happy'.

 

[kabbes]

I have no hope of it really changing anything for the better, but I'll vote yes anyway on the grounds of wanting to make SOME kind of change to this rotten system. I can't help feeling that perpetually refusing to vote to change anything will simply guarantee that nothing ever changes.

Waiting for the poll, by the way...

But put a "sell-by date" on the poll, because you'll want to take another sounding at some point in the future and compare them.

 

[kyser_soze]

Yes, for the same pragmatic reason as kabbes.

 

[kabbes]

Eiffel Tower!

 

[goldenecitrone]

I don't want to see a voting system that gives the Lib Dems any more MPs. They must be annihilated.

 

[past caring]

I have no hope of it really changing anything for the better, but I'll vote yes anyway on the grounds of wanting to make SOME kind of change to this rotten system. I can't help feeling that perpetually refusing to vote to change anything will simply guarantee that nothing ever changes.

Waiting for the poll, by the way...

But put a "sell-by date" on the poll, because you'll want to take another sounding at some point in the future and compare them.

Yes, for the same pragmatic reason as kabbes.

Thinking like this is how we ended up with the LibDems in power.

 

[Jean-Luc]

What's wrong with AV? It's better than PR which is really just party reprresentation where the party leaders decide who gets elected. And better than FPTP -- how can Caroline Lucas claim to represent the people of Brighton Pavillion when only 31% of those who voted voted for her, ie 69% voted against her?

 

[Santino]

I was in favour of AV before the election, but now I think we face the possibility of the Tories and Lib Dems stitching up the next couple of elections. If the coalition lasts Tories will be happy to vote Lib Dem, and the loyalist Lib Dems will be happy to vote Tory. So for pragmatic reasons I would vote no. Although I am open to arguments.

 

[kabbes]

Looking beyond the immediate future, however, I think that FPTP is the thing that keeps the Tories their long-term power base.

 

[Santino]

However, ten or fifteen years in them in power could shift the whole country to the right even more.

 

[kyser_soze]

It's better than PR

It's one form of PR you dolt, as are system like STV. You're only talking about the Party List variant of PR.

 

[Wolveryeti]

What's wrong with AV? It's better than PR which is really just party reprresentation where the party leaders decide who gets elected. And better than FPTP -- how can Caroline Lucas claim to represent the people of Brighton Pavillion when only 31% of those who voted voted for her, ie 69% voted against her?

Simples - you can have open list PR where you get to choose both party and candidate.

And I don't know how you can jump to the conclusion that 69% of voters were against Caroline Lucas because they didn't vote for her, when tactical voting is such a massive part of the electoral process.

From my own perspective AV is shit and nowhere near as proportional as I'd like but it gives voters more power and stops perverse outcomes like a minority candidate sneaking in because politically similar frontrunners have split the vote. So it's better than nothing.

 

[articul8]

It's one form of PR you dolt, as are system like STV. You're only talking about the Party List variant of PR.

No it's not - AV may give a more proprotional outcome - but on some (rarer) ocassions it might be even less proportional than FPTP would be. But it's better than no change.

 

[kabbes]

Does a yes vote for this piece of voting reform make future voting reform more or less likely? Tough question.

 

[articul8]

Boycott any such referendum.

That is a consistent and honourable position if you boycott all electoral intervention as a point of principle.

But if you don't - and I don't (which doesn't make me a liberal any more than it made Lenin or Gramsci liberals) - then you have there are tactical judgements to be made about whether changes to the electoral system are conducive to increasing the size and nature of left representation.

I don't see why campaigning for electoral reform in any way precludes principled and militant campaigning against the cuts and for the class interests of working people?

 

[articul8]

Does a yes vote for this piece of voting reform make future voting reform more or less likely? Tough question.

It is a tough and imporant question - there is a strong argument that says if this falls then no party will future reforms with a barge pole for a number of years - as their opponents will say "voters had the chance to scrap FPTP and they chose not to"....

If we get it, it will make PR for local govt more likely (see argument above) and the STV(Lords)/(AV commons) is better than where we have been stuck for so long?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Does a yes vote for this piece of voting reform make future voting reform more or less likely? Tough question.

Possibly. It's a shit idea for a referendum. As ever in any poll, there needs to be a neither/none of the above option. If you want full pr or stv, how do you vote?

 

[lewislewis]

I'm honestly tempted to vote 'No', I don't think it opens up the door for further reform, it just delays real PR.

Having it on the same day as Scottish and Welsh Parliamentary elections is also pretty disrespectful and a blunder!

 

[Santino]

I think a lot of people who were formerly in favour of some reform will also just vote no to 'punish' the Lib Dems.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Having it on the same day as Scottish and Welsh Parliamentary elections is also pretty disrespectful and a blunder!

Why?

Expecting people to turn out twice to vote in quick succession would be a blunder.

 

[past caring]

That is a consistent and honourable position if you boycott all electoral intervention as a point of principle.

But if you don't - and I don't (which doesn't make me a liberal any more than it made Lenin or Gramsci liberals) - then you have there are tactical judgements to be made about whether changes to the electoral system are conducive to increasing the size and nature of left representation.

I don't see why campaigning for electoral reform in any way precludes principled and militant campaigning against the cuts and for the class interests of working people?

Agreed. But my view is that AV is likely to make it more difficult for radical working class organisations to get candidates elected.

How does AV work? The electorate lists candidates in order of preference (in some AV systems, such as that used in some Australian elections, a failure to list all of the candidates equates to a spoilt ballot) and the candidate with over 50% of the votes cast is elected. If no candidate reaches that threshold, the candidate with the lowest number of votes is eliminated, with their votes being reditributed according to second preferences. The candidate who is now over 50% (or the candidate furthest over 50% if more than one) is elected. Still no-one over 50%? The process continues.....

So say we end up in the following position;

1. radical working class candidate - 40%

2. NuLabour - 25%

3. Libdem - 20%

4. Tory - 15%

Even acknowledging that the entirety of the electorate may well not cast their second preferences in the way the parties themselves ask them to (and it's a given that all of the establishment parties will ask for second preferences to go to one of the other establishment parties if there appears to be any realistic chance of the radical working class candidate doing well) it's a fairly safe bet than none of the Tory votes are going to the radical working class candidate.

I think that's also going to be true whichever way you cut the cake (i.e. - true of LibDem and NuLabour votes).

 

[Wolveryeti]

It's looking apparent that this might be empty grandstanding anyway.

Should voters back AV in a referendum, he [Cameron] could still hold a 2015 election under first past the post if a boundary review equalising constituencies is not complete.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/01/voting-reform-ballot-planned-for-may

 

[Jean-Luc]

It's one form of PR you dolt, as are system like STV. You're only talking about the Party List variant of PR.

Yes, I was and it's the only kind of PR likely to be introduced in Britain as it already exists for Wales, Scotland and London.

I'd have thought that, as an expert on election systems, you'd have known know that STV is not a PR system but AV applied to multi-member constituencies (or, from another angle, AV is STV in single member constituencies). It exists in Scotland for local elections (and in the north of Ireland for all elections) but as it's only for 3 or 4 member wards it doesn't help minority parties only the 4 main ones there. Perhaps someone from Scotland can confirm this.

The case for AV is that it retains the link between a geographical area and its representative (or, even, in different circumstances, delegate). A variant of it exists in England for the elections of mayors where they're elected. presumably because no one thought they could justify the election of a mayor with only 31% of the votes.

Any PR system demands larger constituencies which weakens this link to breaking point and, yes, in effect does hand over the power to nominate MPs, MEPs and councillors to the Party leaders.

 

[sihhi]

1. radical working class candidate - 40%

2. NuLabour - 25%

3. Libdem - 20%

4. Tory - 15%

Spot on. ^^ Above = Labour Victory.

 

[Gromit]

I'd vote if the reform proposals had been worked up by someone completely independant.

But seeing as they are proposed by the government in power then they are always going to be a blatant manipulation to give them a future advange rather than the fairest possible system.

 

[Idaho]

I will, regretfully, abstain. Partly because AV is just the kind of pointless watered down nonsense that calls itself PR but fails to really make a dent on the political system. Partly because it will block the way to real change in the future. Partly to show my disdain for the libdems. And partly...er... because.. beacuse I feel like it.