Do you want AV for the UK? Cast your vote here!

[Dr Dolittle]

The trouble with parliamentary democracy is that while it keeps the government on its toes, you find that whichever party is elected, once they get into power they're all the same, and changing the voting system won't alter that.

But I don't support Colonal Gadafi.

 

[Streathamite]

No, I want a system that is fairer than fptp, one that'll mean my vote won't get chucked straight in the bin and one that will give us a more representative parliament. AV isn't perfect but we're only being given a choice of two. If we vote to keep fptp then that'll be it, we probably won't get asked again in our lifetime.

A good electoral system shouldn't benefit any one party over the others. Fptp patently does.

But-for the umpteenth fucking time - this is not PR,it's not even anywhere near it - it's "FPTP with a twist"

 

[Andrew Hertford]

Labour you mean?

Yep, at one election Labour gets a whacking great majority on less than 40% of the vote, at the next it's the tories.

 

[Andrew Hertford]

But-for the umpteenth fucking time - this is not PR,it's not even anywhere near it - it's "FPTP with a twist"

No it's not PR, that's not on offer, but it's better than fptp.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

But I don't support Colonal Gadafi.

Er, good lad, well done have a round of applause.

 

[Santino]

No it's not PR, that's not on offer, but it's better than fptp.

You do realise that AV can produce even more unproportional parliaments than FPTP? And it could do that just as easily for the Tories as for Labour.

 

[Refused as fuck]

No it's not PR, that's not on offer, but it's better than fptp.

Why are you voting with the BNP?

 

[Santino]

Why are you voting with Nick Clegg, Danny Alexander and David Laws?

 

[Streathamite]

No it's not PR, that's not on offer, but it's better than fptp.

not necessarily, and when/if so very,very,very slightly

 

[articul8]

Why are you voting with the BNP?

BNP are voting No dumbass

 

[articul8]

Unlike, say, the Tories?

absolutely - they won't concede PR directly but there is a chink of light in that the public now has the chance to ditch FPTP.

 

[Refused as fuck]

BNP are voting No dumbass

What did I say?

absolutely - they won't concede PR directly but there is a chink of light in that the public now has the chance to ditch FPTP.

Oh, you are such a card.

 

[greenman]

Probable scenarios in case of Yes or No votes on AV:
Scenario 1 : No Vote : Tories see this as a major victory. They, Labour dinosaur tendency and media argue that there is no appetite for electoral reform. Any further relectoral reform recedes into the distant future.
We revert to Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle Dee (with Tweedle Dee Labour making left noises but basically Blairite and untroubled by any challengers to its left due to the electoral system, carrying its leftist prisoners into backing it into power again - in 2015 or 2020 - only to implement more "soft/gradual" neo-liberal totalitarianism and social engineering and Transatlantic butt licking).

Liberal grassroots very upset, some defections, but most know that they are in a similar position to the Irish Greens, Irish PDs, German FDP and other "doormat" coalition parties - if they pull the plug on the coalition they will be the major victims. Turkeys do not vote for Christmas, particularly ones as unprincipled as the Lib Dems.

The coalition continues its slash and burn policy with a fake "economic revival" (read export boom based on rest of world recovering in a Keynesian fashion and Tories driving down Brit wages and smashing remaining unions) and tax cuts - ripped from the living standards of public sector workers, their pensions and the benefits of the poor and disabled. Lib Dems either utter mild criticism in last year of Govt to appease their core vote (if economic plan "works") or leadership seeks safe Tory seats and leave rump to their fate (if economic plan "fails"). Or vice-versa - they are opportunists after all!

We are all royally shafted......again.

Scenario 2 : Yes Vote. Clegg happy.
His rank and file suggest that now he has what they wanted they are in a position of strength that they/he oppose more of the regressive policies. Position of Orange Bookers and Tories in coalition is weaker. Union and popular pressure stands more chance of driving back some of policies.

Tory right is rampant at Cameron's "failure and betrayal" and there are defections to UKIP.

Smaller parties now able to counter arguments that a first pref vote for them is wasted - vote for Greens and Left parties (and possibly Rightist parties also) in all elections rise. Labour's right is weakened as argument that they need primarily to appeal to middle class, Middle England voters in marginal seats is defunct. Labour able to move a few notches leftward to counter new possibilities for parties to their left.

Electoral reformers feel empowered to launch massive campaign for parties to go into next election pledged to referendum on Proportional voting system.

Conclusion
Whilst there are negatives for the left in both scenarios, a Yes vote offers the better opportunities IMO. However, in both scenarios the major factors deciding what happens politically will be a) the economic situation and b) the scale/level of resistance.

 

[Streathamite]

greenman-PLEASE break up your paragraphs!

 

[weltweit]

greenman-PLEASE break up your paragraphs!

Yep, I agree, it just looks like a mess of words otherwise, totally unreadable.

 

[Refused as fuck]

Yep, I agree, it just looks like a mess of words otherwise, totally unreadable.

 

[redsquirrel]

No, vote for what you believe in. If you want a system that'll continually benefit the tories and will continually give us governments with less than 40% of the vote then vote for fptp. I'm sure millions will join you..

That can equally happen with AV you lying sod.

This thread has shown what the yes camp is really about - propping up the LibDems and hoping they'll move "back" to what they were so we can have a LibLab coalition. Fuck that.

 

[articul8]

It's not about wanting a coalition with the LDs - it's about not wanting a Tory majority.

 

[Random]

Scenario 2 : Yes Vote. Clegg happy.
His rank and file suggest that now he has what they wanted they are in a position of strength that they/he oppose more of the regressive policies. Position of Orange Bookers and Tories in coalition is weaker. Union and popular pressure stands more chance of driving back some of policies.

Tory right is rampant at Cameron's "failure and betrayal" and there are defections to UKIP.

Smaller parties now able to counter arguments that a first pref vote for them is wasted - vote for Greens and Left parties (and possibly Rightist parties also) in all elections rise. Labour's right is weakened as argument that they need primarily to appeal to middle class, Middle England voters in marginal seats is defunct. Labour able to move a few notches leftward to counter new possibilities for parties to their left.

Electoral reformers feel empowered to launch massive campaign for parties to go into next election pledged to referendum on Proportional voting system.

Conclusion
Whilst there are negatives for the left in both scenarios, a Yes vote offers the better opportunities IMO. However, in both scenarios the major factors deciding what happens politically will be a) the economic situation and b) the scale/level of resistance.

Your second scenario assumes that Clegg is somehow an abberation, that there's this wonderful LD grassroots to hold him back. The chose him, just like the LP chose Blair. He's not going anywhere, and neither are his policies. If anything a Yes victory will cement Clegg's position.

Plus you're assuming about some 'massive' campaign for PR going into the next election. I suppose we can ask articul8 - is this what will ahppen? Is there a big fat budget put aside for this?

 

[kabbes]

Your second scenario assumes that Clegg is somehow an abberation, that there's this wonderful LD grassroots to hold him back. The chose him, just like the LP chose Blair. He's not going anywhere, and neither are his policies. If anything a Yes victory will cement Clegg's position.

And not just Clegg's personal position either, but the whole philosophy behind Clegg's approach. Giving Clegg a kicking might discourage others from taking a similar route in future. And that would be more valuable for future generations than this alternative FPTP.

 

[stethoscope]

Your second scenario assumes that Clegg is somehow an abberation, that there's this wonderful LD grassroots to hold him back. The chose him, just like the LP chose Blair. He's not going anywhere, and neither are his policies. If anything a Yes victory will cement Clegg's position.

This.

 

[redsquirrel]

It's not about wanting a coalition with the LDs - it's about not wanting a Tory majority.

Which is going to be done how - oh yeah by helping the LibDems.

That is implicitly your argument, but neither of you has the guts to actually come out and say it.

 

[butchersapron]

For those of you making the case for AV on the grounds of increased 'democracy' and accountability, here's a spot in summary of why it won't and why it in fact makes your vote for something worth even less than it is now:

And what would be the result of AV? More coalitions. More occasions where the government was chosen not by the public but by politicians, after the election, in private negotiations. More occasions when the programme of the government had not even been presented to the people, when politicians do the opposite of what they’d said they’d do in the election campaign. The function of the electorate will no longer be to choose the government, but simply to alter the power-relationship between parties in an almost random way — one that does not necessarily bear any relationship to how much more or less support each party has. As Oxford Professor Vernon Bogdanor argued in an excellent Guardian opinion, indirect elections would replace direct elections. Accountability to the people would be reduced.

In brief, Clegg, Cameron and Miliband will get to decide the make-up of the govt behind closed doors with no accountability to voters and on the basis of horse trading/giving away the programs that they've just presented to the electorate and the election was voted on. Magic.

 

[Streathamite]

Surely we'd get the same with proper PR?

 

[butchersapron]

Yep - that's why chasing after electoral reform without changing the economic system that the political process legitimises is a chimera.

 

[Streathamite]

Your second scenario assumes that Clegg is somehow an abberation, that there's this wonderful LD grassroots to hold him back. The chose him, just like the LP chose Blair. He's not going anywhere, and neither are his policies. If anything a Yes victory will cement Clegg's position.

There IS a progressive part of the LDs incredibly diverse grassroots(well,there's a part of EVERYTHING in there!),and they are massively pissed off right now - but a 'YES' vote will hugely strengthen the Leadership-and kill their chances of bringing him to heel,for at least 2 years.I actually know LDs who are voting 'NO', solely for this reason

 

[8ball]

Yep - that's why chasing after electoral reform without changing the economic system that the political process legitimises is a chimera.

I think many on here are quite aware of that and would just like to choose the option that does the most damage to the coalition.

 

[butchersapron]

This just gets better - the main people behind the YES campaign are the Electoral Reform Society - they pay A8 wages to argue his case here. It now appears that not only they have not declared a large part of their funding for the campaign but they also are the majority shareholder in Electoral Reform Services Ltd, who guess what...make their profit running european and UK elections as commercial ventures (providing electoral services - "stationary and postal voting packs, poll cards and ballot papers") and as they themselves say “it is possible that ERSL will profit as a result of a YES vote (increased business opportunities).”

Nice little stitch up here eh? More New Politics from the pluralists.

 

[butchersapron]

I think many on here are quite aware of that and would just like to choose the option that does the most damage to the coalition.

Have you been following these debates?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think Clegg clearly wants a yes vote. I also suspect that Cameron would be quite happy with a yes vote too, as it may serve to strengthen the coalition, which I think Cameron may well see as something that he would like to be permanent. Would Cameron prefer another coalition after the next election or for the Conservatives to rule on their own? I'm pretty sure he would prefer a coalition over a narrow majority – paradoxically, it gives him more power by neutralising his own backbenchers.

All this referendum does is highlight the rotten situation we are in. I shall be boycotting it.