paulr

I will be voting for it.

1. Its fairer
2. Anything to shake up the cosy two party monopoly we have had for too long.

Make sure you vote. Apathy could be the biggest danger to getting it through.

Bonehead

Have to admit I'm gonna give it some thought.

The last lot were a total load of 5hite whilst the new lot have managed to pi55 off their core voters so maybe giving newer parties a shout's maybe a good thing. Something new and all that.

After all the Tories are making themselves unvotable and anyone wanting vote for that joke of wet blanket bumbling mumbling Milliband needs their head examind

scud8

iTrader: (1)

I definitely won't be voting for it. As hutton_d says, coalition governments tend to end up with incoherent policies - and when minority parties end up holding the balance of power the result can leave a bad taste in the mouth. Can you imagine what (further) special treatment for Scotland the SNP would have insisted on as the price for supporting a Labour/LibDem coalition government after the last election - good job Clegg had the sense not to trust Gordo.

paulr

Churchill said......................

That may have applied nearly 60 years ago but society has changed. I just think too many MP's are too comfortable in their safe seats. AV would at least make some of them take more notice of the electors.

paulr

Would you say the policies of the present government are incoherent. I would say they are pretty decisive. Cut the deficit.

PaulC72

No matter what happens we will be screwed over anyway.

paulr

Thanks for such a positive contribution.

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

I personally find it astonishing that 11 years into the 21th Century we still can't come up with a more imaginative way of electing our political representatives and holding them to account than first-past-the-post elections held every 5 years. If AV goes even a little way towards addressing that, it's got to be worth a shot.

stanny_wrx

iTrader: (1)

i want to see a proper party with proper veiws and ideas that will bring the country back to where it should be instead of pathetic attempts of keeping voters happy ie.1p off a litre i mean you ve got all that power do something decent with it!

paulr

Exactly. We still have this winner takes all system which you have to say, hasn't really served us well.
One example, the terrible state of UK pensions.

mart360

Well if they carry on plugging it as AV, it will die a death.

i had to google it, as i didnt have a clue, as i suspect do many others!


MArt

hodgy0_2

although undecided (and the small c conservative in me ers towards fptp) the compelling argument for AV is that politicians in safe seats in particular and politicians in general will have to work harder for your vote

sitting MP's with large majorities can do very little and still get re-elected

it might shake them up a bit

PaulC72

Sadly facts are facts.

All MP's are out for themselves only this has been proven several times and highlighted even moreso over the last couple of years.

If they really cared for us the normal public they would do something about the state of the country but all they really want to do is line their own pockets and call each other liars.

I do think we need a fresh party in and I hoped the coalition would at least go some way to making the change we needed as a country, but so far it seems to only be failing us.

All that ever happens is us 'normal' people get to pay more for less in the end.

chris_b

iTrader: (1)

I had to google it too, from what I read australia has been using it for years, and it seems to work really well, maybe it can work over here too? Could be good for a change

scud8

iTrader: (1)

Not really surprising - it's been proven (see the Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem and Arrow's theorem) that there is no ideal voting system when there are 3 or more candidates - they can all either come up with odd results or encourage tactical voting.

AsifScoob

This is a good thread and subject.

Personally I would go all the way for PR. There seems to be too much vested interest in FPTP and for that reason alone it is worth changing it IMO.

PR would actually favour the Tories for instance, as although they get plenty of votes, they are all in the same seats. I thought that PR would actually take into account ALL of the votes a party gets.

This should encourage more people to vote, as they will feel it does count and I also feel it is more representative of overall views, even if they do include one MP from the BNP. So what? That's democracy, IMO.

Back on topic, if AV goes some way toward that then fine. I do feel that reform is needed.

Asif

warrenm2

can the mods change this to include a poll?

Leslie

I think it would be a big mistake. It is being proposed by the lesser parties purely for their own perceived advantage.

First past the post is the most positive method. PR will lead to more chance of coalition governments with the airy fairy results that we are seeing now.

Coalition goverments lead to constant bargaining between the participants and we consequently dont get the sort of positive government that we need and what the majority of people voted for.

New methods are not necessarily the answer.

Our biggest problem now is that career politicians will tend to govern to their own advantage rather than that of the people of this country.

Les

scud8

iTrader: (1)

Can we run it under the AV system?

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

From living in a Labour stronghold region I am all for another voting system that reflects my wishes better. However I'm not sure if AV delivers that.

I would like to see a re-dress to ensure election results aren't skewed by the minority of the population who ignorantly vote out of sheer habit simple because they see a rose next to box on their ballot paper. These are the ones responsible in preventing any other political party from gaining any form of power. This minority of people is massively outnumbered by the number of people who just simply didn't vote (and has been the case since the early 1990's!). When we have a voter turn out as low as 60% that leave a 40% shortfall of votes; most of which will not be for the stronghold party.

I would like to see a 'vote of no confidence in all of the candidates' option accompanied by a mandatory voting system.

One thing is for sure, with the present formation of our constituency areas which are purposely sized and arranged to ensure a leading party's foothold, the current vote counting system need to be changed.

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Nope, can't be done to existing threads.

Leslie

I certainly agree with the "free vote" as mentioned above. Candidates as voted in by their constituents should be abkle to vote as their conscience dictates and represent what the candidate's electors voted for.

Les

paulr

A few points.

1. The UK is a coalition of different people. political parties are a coalition. Some marriages are a coalition. Its a fact of life.
2. You say "what the majority of people voted for". Since 1945 very few governments have had a majority of the voters. Most have absolute power on a minority vote. Even the President of the USA doesn't have that much power on a minority vote.

I just dont think the present system has served us well.

Leslie

I have to say that I don't see your points adding up to an argument.

I certainly did not vote with a coalition in mind. I voted for certain principles which I believe and which I fondly expected would be supported by the party I voted for. The fact that they reneged on promises to this country will almost certainly affect any future vote from me! That is a different matter however!

Cameron was forced ito a coalition in order to achieve power. Does not make it a good thing since his hands are tied to a large extent or he faces a collapse of the coalition which is keeping him in power. I certainly did not vote for Clegg's policies! We now have a weakened government which is not profiting this country.

AV we are told will lead to more chance of coalition goverments and from what I have seen so far, this is the last thing that this country needs, it does in fact show that AV would be a very bad system to adopt since the majority of people would not be able to vote positively for the policies that they in fact wish to see in place.

They can shout all they like about "fairness" etc but the fact is, it would be a bad thing for the country. That is what really counts as far as our future is concerned.

Les

Ray T

How about an easier way to Vote!, I am registered for a postal vote , it now turns out that I probably won't get the voting form before I have to fly out on a business trip, so screwed both "normal ways" bring on internet voting (probably get a bigger "turnout" as well.