UK AV Referendum Poll

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's not an important enough story to get its own thread, so I'll put it here. But former Croydon Central MP Andrew Pelling (elected as a Tory in 2005, ceased to be so after what could euphemistically be described as a spot of bother, ran as an Independent in 2010, lost) has joined the Labour Party.

[You kip if you want to...]

I was away for the Clegg/Cam speeches, just watching them now. Dave's is really good, one of the only things I agree with him on.

[Leftbehind]

I was going to vote no*, but I think I'll take a leaf out of some of the posters in this thread and just spoil my ballot with a statement making clear I wanted PR on there.

*
1) the system itself rewards centrism - the last thing we need in Britain at the moment, and the 50% requirement will make it harder for the few left-wingers who've managed to break the mould. 
2) it's a self-serving option accepted by the Lib Dems because they'll do the best out of it
3) it's all Clegg's got to show for his disastrous coalition agreement; if this fails Lib Dems will have got nothing in turn for propping up an extreme-right government that's alienated nearly every left-winger who voted for them, and will be less resolute in sticking with the coalition once we hit the 'summer of discontent'.
4) it'll feel so good to give Clegg/the traitorous Lib Dems a kicking.

[Silent Hunter]

Welcome to the forum, Leftbehind! Good opening post!

[You kip if you want to...]

I was going to vote no*, but I think I'll take a leaf out of some of the posters in this thread and just spoil my ballot with a statement making clear I wanted PR on there.

*
1) the system itself rewards centrism - the last thing we need in Britain at the moment, and the 50% requirement will make it harder for the few left-wingers who've managed to break the mould. 
2) it's a self-serving option accepted by the Lib Dems because they'll do the best out of it
3) it's all Clegg's got to show for his disastrous coalition agreement; if this fails Lib Dems will have got nothing in turn for propping up an extreme-right government that's alienated nearly every left-winger who voted for them, and will be less resolute in sticking with the coalition once we hit the 'summer of discontent'.
4) it'll feel so good to give Clegg/the traitorous Lib Dems a kicking.

My feelings exactly.

[You kip if you want to...]

Angus Reid (joke pollster)
Yes - 32% (-3)
No - 26% (+5)
DK - 35% (-2)

[Smid]

Antony Green, on his blog dispels the myths (and outright lies) being peddled by some in the "no" camp. Apparently one organisation is quoting from the ACT Electoral Commission website, and saying that it shows how complex AV/IRV is... except, of course, that the ACT elections aren't AV/IRV, they're PR-STV...

Edit: The link goes to the blog, but not the main page of his blog, just articles tagged "UK AV Referendum"

[You kip if you want to...]

I just wish the Yes camp would drop this myth that AV is somehow more proportional.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8506306.stm - Those results are way more proportional.

[afleitch]

I just wish the Yes camp would drop this myth that AV is somehow more proportional.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8506306.stm - Those results are way more proportional.

The problem is both sides tend to be peddling half-truths. I can't back AV because it's not proportional; if it's not STV on the table, I'll stick with FPTP where 'winner takes all' at least makes a resemblence of sense.

[You kip if you want to...]

I just wish the Yes camp would drop this myth that AV is somehow more proportional.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8506306.stm - Those results are way more proportional.

The problem is both sides tend to be peddling half-truths. I can't back AV because it's not proportional; if it's not STV on the table, I'll stick with FPTP where 'winner takes all' at least makes a resemblence of sense.

Exactly my point. FPTP just makes the most sense really, if we're going to stay un-proportional.

Although, if MMP is good enough for Scotland and Wales, and has produced quite stable governments in both assemblies, why isn't it good enough for the rest of the UK? It's been shown to work. AV is unproven (on an national level, before someone says "Oh, but it's used for leadership elections!").

[afleitch]

I just wish the Yes camp would drop this myth that AV is somehow more proportional.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8506306.stm - Those results are way more proportional.

The problem is both sides tend to be peddling half-truths. I can't back AV because it's not proportional; if it's not STV on the table, I'll stick with FPTP where 'winner takes all' at least makes a resemblence of sense.

Exactly my point. FPTP just makes the most sense really, if we're going to stay un-proportional.

Although, if MMP is good enough for Scotland and Wales, and has produced quite stable governments in both assemblies, why isn't it good enough for the rest of the UK? It's been shown to work. AV is unproven (on an national level, before someone says "Oh, but it's used for leadership elections!").

I think MMP in the UK would require even larger seats than are being proposed; perhaps something like a reduction to 400 constituencies and 200 top-ups. I'd prefer STV in Scotland even though it would hurt the Tories who in the council elections were transfer repellant.

[Smid]

I just wish the Yes camp would drop this myth that AV is somehow more proportional.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8506306.stm - Those results are way more proportional.

The problem is both sides tend to be peddling half-truths. I can't back AV because it's not proportional; if it's not STV on the table, I'll stick with FPTP where 'winner takes all' at least makes a resemblence of sense.

I like the idea of STV for reforming the Lords, while leaving some sort of single member districts for the Commons, to maximise the chance of majority governments. The Lords is meant to be a house of review, so minority opinions are best protected/heard there.

[Franzl]

Proportionality is very strongly overrated.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Although, if MMP is good enough for Scotland and Wales, and has produced quite stable governments in both assemblies

As mentioned already () MMP has not produced stability in Wales (indeed instability has been worryingly common; I won't bore everyone with what happened four years ago again, but the first few years of the Assembly were an utter mess with the leaders of the two largest parties forced out within a very narrow period of time).

[afleitch]

Although, if MMP is good enough for Scotland and Wales, and has produced quite stable governments in both assemblies

As mentioned already () MMP has not produced stability in Wales (indeed instability has been worryingly common; I won't bore everyone with what happened four years ago again, but the first few years of the Assembly were an utter mess with the leaders of the two largest parties forced out within a very narrow period of time).

Is that 'a Wales' being used as a type of measurement again

[minionofmidas]

Since when is the system used in Australia for millenia "unproven"?

Why doesn't that BBC link show 2010 (oh, and btw, except for 1997 these results look marginally more proportional than the real results to me. And anyways, AV is all about making people's dislikes count as well as their preferences... making statements about its proportionality based on a comparison with first pref.s only is obviously dishonest.)

[Leftbehind]

So will the vast majority - usually pushing to around 80% - of voters, those for Labour or Tory get their dislike registered? No. It's not in the least proportional (you've mentioned the '97 distortion but not once throughout the 80's would it have readdressed Thatcher's overall majorities on a low 40's mandate) and it's not dishonest to use first preferences-only when for near-4/5ths of the electorate that's all it will be.

In truth Orange Bookers, UKIP and BNP voters will be the one's dominating the dislike field - and they're hardly typical of the UK voter.

[minionofmidas]

So will the vast majority - usually pushing to around 80% - of voters, those for Labour or Tory get their dislike registered? No.

Labour voters will, all across the South of England with a few exceptions mostly in the cities.

Of course, we don't know exactly how many South of Englanders, both in ConLab and ConLD seats, are already simulating AV with their fptp ballots. Evidently it's quite a few - Labour and LD support are blatantly not naturally distributed - but it's impossible to pinpoint how many.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, no it wouldn't have. It would have made things marginally more proportional but nowhere near actually proportional. It's still basically the same thing as FPTP and still suffering from basically the same defects.
Then again, half the Alliance voters appear to have still preferred Thatcher to Foot and Kinnock, so...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When comparing a system based on the premise that first preferences only should count with a system based on the premise other factors too should matter, it is intellectual dishonesty to set the parameters of the comparison based on the more exclusive premise. It's quite a common obfuscating tactic.

Nothing personal, of course.

[Leftbehind]

Labour voters will, all across the South of England with a few exceptions mostly in the cities.

Of course, we don't know exactly how many South of Englanders, both in ConLab and ConLD seats, are already simulating AV with their fptp ballots. Evidently it's quite a few - Labour and LD support are blatantly not naturally distributed - but it's impossible to pinpoint how many.

An assumption based off the 2010 electorate which isn't relevant anymore. If Labour haven't already overtaken the Lib Dems in most constituencies in the South, which polls suggest they have, then they'll be unlikely to go on preferencing the Lib Dems again. For a long time Lib Dems courted the Labour vote saying they were the best chance at keeping out the Tories, and so these voters in many ways were one of the first casualties of the Lib Dem vote.

No, no it wouldn't have. It would have made things marginally more proportional but nowhere near actually proportional. It's still basically the same thing as FPTP and still suffering from basically the same defects.
Then again, half the Alliance voters appear to have still preferred Thatcher to Foot and Kinnock, so...

But that's surely the point - the Alliance voters shouldn't have to have picked between Thatcher or Foot - they should've had enough seats proportional to their vote to bring about a coalition. We're getting a system that is essentially the same as FPTP, with even some notable downsides, but dressed up as voting reform for a proportional and mandated government - which is absolute rubbish.

When comparing a system based on the premise that first preferences only should count with a system based on the premise other factors too should matter, it is intellectual dishonesty to set the parameters of the comparison based on the more exclusive premise. It's quite a common obfuscating tactic.

Nothing personal, of course.

You're still left with an overwhelming majority of voters not factored into an exclusive system whereby they lose any input via preferences simply because they chose one of the main two.

[minionofmidas]

An assumption based off the 2010 electorate which isn't relevant anymore. If Labour haven't already overtaken the Lib Dems in most constituencies in the South, which polls suggest they have, then they'll be unlikely to go on preferencing the Lib Dems again.

Quite conceivably, yeah.

No, no it wouldn't have. It would have made things marginally more proportional but nowhere near actually proportional. It's still basically the same thing as FPTP and still suffering from basically the same defects.
Then again, half the Alliance voters appear to have still preferred Thatcher to Foot and Kinnock, so...

But that's surely the point - the Alliance voters shouldn't have to have picked between Thatcher or Foot - they should've had enough seats proportional to their vote to bring about a coalition. We're getting a system that is essentially the same as FPTP, with even some notable downsides, but dressed up as voting reform for a proportional and mandated government - which is absolute rubbish.
[/quote]Yeah, claiming the results would be proportional (as opposed to "somewhat more proportional") is obvious rubbish.
Maybe I'm just not being exposed to the dumber pro arguments as much as the dumber con arguments?
Though I still don't see the "notable downsides" compared to fptp.

[Leftbehind]

It could shelve demands for proper reform, or it could prejudice voters away from a proportional system, seeing as coalitions in FPTP/AV are awkward and will require matching parties of two different electoral basis, rather than in a PR system that would have a fairly varied spectrum of political parties to choose from which allow for logical coalitions.

It is still a FPTP system, and including just minor parties in the preferences, which is dominated by the Right (Liberals, UKIP, BNP) surely means the Right could win far more constituencies, but with no proportionality in place to allow the Left and its significant electorate to be represented.

Are two of my biggest concerns.

[minionofmidas]

It could shelve demands for proper reform,

That's an issue with the referendum itself, not with AV. And is true irrespective of the outcome.
Remember the Australian referendum on the monarchy?

[Leftbehind]

That's true, but I doubt we'll be adopting a whole new voting system to then change it in a couple of years - whereas I think it's fairly easy to argue that AV's failure isn't representative of a lack of desire for PR, and that it's time we were offered a PR system through referenda.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I really don't understand the arguments of PR supporters against AV. FPP is the worst possible system in the world (excluding multi-seat winner-takes-all, but this would be just crazy) and whatever would replace it would be better.

[Franzl]

Anything that has to do with party lists is bad.....FPTP, AV or STV are all acceptable to me.