Comments on: A Proportional Response

By: Eddie

Eddie — Tue, 10 May 2005 09:17:00 +0000

The chance of this country getting STV are precisely zero. We need to be realistic – AV+ is the only measure on the table that is likely to bring the government together. AV+ still leaves a chance of a government forming without coalitions, and let’s face it, no government is ever going to bring in a system that will force coalitions all the time.

I saw the same interview, Justin. As Phil says, AV is not a proportional system, so there is no chance that people will accept AV as a replacement to FPTP. But Hain could look like he is prepared to compromise by agreeing with AV+.

Much as I hate the Tories, I can’t help but feel that deliberately trying to destroy them by changing the electoral system would be ridiculously underhand.

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 09 May 2005 23:17:00 +0000

Why not just ‘Fair Votes’? Simple, to the point, and constantly asking politicians ‘why are you against fair votes’ means that eventually one will answer ‘But it’s not fair!’ which would be fun.

And I personally favour STV, one good reason because it’s the system that politicians fear most because they have to work to get votes for themselves, not just their party.

By: Phil

Phil — Mon, 09 May 2005 20:18:00 +0000

New Labour polled 35.2% of the vote. The Tories took 32.3%, the Lib Dems 22% and other parties 10.5% meaning 64.8% of the votes cast were not for New Labour. More people (38.7% of the electorate) did not vote at all than voted for New Labour.

I think you mean “non-voters were a larger proportion of the total electorate than the proportion of those who did vote who voted Labour”. What you’ve actually written was true last time and, I think, even in 1997.

As for Peter Hain, he’s been an advocate of AV for a long time. He wrote a book on PR in 1986; it was called Proportional Misrepresentation, which might be a clue to his position! He came down in favour of AV, despite the fact that it’s not actually proportional.

By: Justin

Justin — Mon, 09 May 2005 19:47:00 +0000

Unity: thanks for that – should have read the article more than once.

Eddie: Funnily enough, I saw Peter Hain interviewed the other day (just where escapes me) and when he was pulled up on electoral reform he expressed his fondness for the Alternative Vote. So he’s given it an early airing.

By: Murky

Murky — Mon, 09 May 2005 19:43:00 +0000

If Lab voters go 1 Lab, 2 LD and vice versa, (something I disagree with, I would not vote for NuLab), why is this a problem?

If a system allows a voter to say ‘I prefer this guy, I don’t mind that guy, but I don’t want him’ Why shouldn’t the first two get the lion’s share?

You’re also forgetting that when preferences can be expressed people can vote for, as an example, green, without letting in THOSE people.

Personally, I’d rather go with Condorcet or STV than AV+, but AV+ is better than FPTP and FPTP is SO bad….

By: Eddie

Eddie — Mon, 09 May 2005 18:28:00 +0000

I am very concerned that these demands are going to come true by the end of this Parliament, but not in the way everyone wants.

Remember Labour has the AV+ vote system sitting deep in a Whitehall safe, raring to go?

If Labour looks like it’s going to lose the next election it’s going to dig it out and implement it, for the prime reason that the constituency candidates will be rankable as well as giving an extra vote for a “top up” list.

The top up may make it slightly more proportional (don’t expect much more of a “top up” as is provided in Scotland under AMS), but Labour like the sound of AV+ because Labour voters are going to vote 1-Lab, 2-LD… and LD voters are going to do the reverse. This will make the Tories lose very large numbers of constituencies, thus killing them off and allowing Labour to carry on.

Beware AV+. Roy Jenkins knew exactly what he was doing.

By: Katie

Katie — Mon, 09 May 2005 18:21:00 +0000

Equitable Representation has too many syllables to be properly catchy.

What about “Fair Share” voting? It rhymes. You can see it in 48 pt under a red masthead already.

Of course, it sounds like something Randian heroes would coruscatingly lambast, and therefore you would lose the Notting Hill set. Who needs them though? Bunch of gin monkeys.

By: Unity

Unity — Mon, 09 May 2005 18:08:00 +0000

Justin:

The figures quoted by the Daily Mail for the ‘popular vote’ are for England only.