taffboy gwyrdd
Embrace the confusion!
as soon as the AV vote is behind us, whatever the result, the LDs will have a lot less reason to stick around.
Yes or No -AV referendum May 2011
- Thread starter articul8
- Start date
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
I think a Labour government would have introduced damaging cuts but less severe, less quickly and less regressively. But I am not of the (pre-)school that thinks that all that is needed to kick the ass of the Lib Dems (though we should do that too), return Labour and all will be well. It won't. And where Labour councillors are pushing through coalition cuts that is deeply problematic. But given that Labour votes are the only way of shifting the coalition parties - then fighting the internal battles to shape what kind of Labour government we get is important, but the space in which that takes place will be determined by the extra-parliamentary level of community politics and trade union militancy.
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
"Electing a pro-cuts party is the only way to shift the pro-cuts parties." There's something deeply wrong with this statement.
I'm not sure; I like the idea of people being able to vote for who they really want but have a backup just in case, as AV anf STV allows. But I"m in favour of multi-member constituencies. FPTP and STV can do that, but AV can't. So I guess that means I want STV, which is what the Lib Dems actually want, so maybe I should vote no for the status quo. I suspect AV is just a way for Nick Clegg to appease his MPs when he did the deal with the Tories, as it was the least worst option for the Tories.
AV is simply a pathetic attempt by the Lib-Dems to gain perhaps a couple more seats.. if you vote tory your second preference is unlikley to be labour.. the lib-dems are likely to be your second preference, vote labour the lib-dems are your likely second.. it's all a load of bollocks!
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
How does that follow - what are the benefits of keeping FPTP? If you want STV then the shift to preferential voting prepares the ground.
Yeah. In 100 years' time.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
Not necessarily - but frankly given that a majority against PR exists on both Labour and Tory benches - and will do the foreseeable future given that it is the system that hands power to them, I don';t see what the alternative is.
More worryingly for PR supporters - Tory backbenchers could well. use a vote to keep FPTP in the Commons as an excuse to backtrack on PR for the Lords.
More worryingly for PR supporters - Tory backbenchers could well. use a vote to keep FPTP in the Commons as an excuse to backtrack on PR for the Lords.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
And your response to this is to campaign for a potentially worse variant of FPTP!
Louis MacNeice
For the millionth time on this thread, a8, I couldn't give a crap what they think. I have my own brain and can do my own thinking on the subject.
You could be right. I haven't checked the Bill, but usually they put in a clause that a referendum can't be re-held on the same proposition for another 10 years. So if we vote 'yes' then we will be stuck with AV for another 10 years, whereas if we vote no then STV could be brought to the table at any time.
I know that a new Parliament theoretically and reverse the decision of a previously Parliament, but the political ramifications would be too big.
As kabbes says, AV is a lot like FPTP, except for these:
1. FPTP means a candidate can theoretically only need a majority of 1 vote, where with AV they need 50%+1 of the vote
2. FPTP can be used in multi-member wards
3. As AV is more complicated due to the preferential voting, so all the case law around FPTP would be irrelevant. At the moment for example if someone draws a smiley face next to the candidates name it counts as a vote. So long as the law says that an 'X' or other symbol counts as a '1', then there shouldn't be a problem as people get used to the system, so what happened it Scotland with STV doesn't happen in the rest of the UK.
BTW, why is it when I try to type FPTP my mind tells me to type FTP! Does that mean I'm more IT oriented than political?!
10 years and then some, I'd say. Nobody is seriously going to suggest changing the whole damn system AGAIN within the next 30 years at least. You don't make a massive constitutional change and then immediately make another one. I'll be an old man by the time the issue is back on the table.
You could be right; it took about 30 years between the first Assembly referendum and the one in the 1990s before devolution came to Wales.
Knowing that only makes whether to vote yes or no more unclear!
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
OK - but people have been campaigning to move beyond FPTP since the 1880s and now we finally get the chance to finally make some movement in 2011 you want to shoot it down - how, given the institutional resistance of both Tory and Labour MPs to shift to PR, how are you going to get it back on the agenda in a shorter time frame when the public will have just voted down even a modest change in the system?
Plus, you might even strengthen the hand of the Tory rearguard to block PR in the Lords as they can claim the public has no appetite for different systems.
Your mate Clegg has fucked us either way.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
I don't accept that it is worse. It frees people up to vote for who they actually support.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
How is it potentially worse? Could you outline a realistic scenario in which AV produces a less representative result than FPTP?
And elects someone they didn't vote for. Hoo-fucking-ray.
How about a scenario in which lots of Lib Dem voters put Tory as their second preference, and the Tories get an even greater share of seats than currently, i.e. even less proportional to their share of the vote?
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
The Jenkins report found that AV could be less proportional than FPTP; a conclusion that the Lib Dems cited in their opposition to AV prior to last year's election. Also an opinion which used to be promoted by none other than the Electoral Reform Society, who in the past have stated that:
Cheers - Louis MacNeice
AV is thus not a proportional system, and can in fact be more disproportional than FPTP... It does very little to improve the voice of traditionally under-represented groups in parliament, strengthening the dominance of the 'central' viewpoint.
Cheers - Louis MacNeice
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It's debatable as to whether or not that is less proportional. AV provides some opportunity to signal your least favourite candidate as well as your favourite (assuming there are only three main candidates). I still haven't seen a totally convincing argument to say that Thatcher would have been elected by AV throughout the 80s. In fact there appears to be evidence that she wouldn't have been, which makes sense given the levels of hatred for her – those who hated her would be able not only to not vote for her once, but effectively to not vote for her twice.
Um, that's just a statement that it could be less proportional, not an argument that it is. That quote from the Electoral Reform Society is so vague as to be meaningless.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yes. And in a situation where there are three choices, I would argue that 'most hated' is just as important a category as 'most liked'. That's the main problem I have with the currrent system – that it gives no weight at all to 'most hated', except when voters take it upon themselves to vote tactically, a situation which, as far as I can see, is profoundly undemocratic.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
That's what I said. It's also what the ERS said and the Jenkins Report. Your point is?
Louis MacNeice
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
My point is that all you're doing is appealing to authority, which is a waste of time really.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
You can go and read the Jenkins Report or research the past statements of the ERS; then you can make your own mind up regarding the appeal or otherwise of their authority (or as I'd prefer to put it make up your own mind regarding their evidence and methodology).
I am glad to see you've let go of the claim that I was saying AV is less proportional than FPTP.
Louis MacNeice
Similar threads
