Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
observer

A.V. Referendum ?

Recommended Posts

There's another issue, that Parliament ducked when passing this Referendum bill - normally, in the case of any constitutional change, a two-thirds majority is required. If the turnout in May is around the usual 30%, that means two-thirds of eligible voters won't even be voting on the issue. So a simple majority of those 30% who vote, could mean that the issue could be decided by as few as 16% of those eligible to vote - not very proportional is it? This contrasts sharply with the Tory arguement for trade union reform, which would require a majority of "all eligible" votes, for industrial action. Yet another example of the expediency of politics. :roll: PS. they could of course adopt the EU system, where; if they don't get the answer they want; they make you vote again until they get the answer they want! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The majority of the government want no in the vote Obs, I have no objection to them doing the vote again if the no vote carries the day :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dizzy, AV won't give you a mixture of the parties, just one winner who may have the least number of points that you like. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why are you against Peter, because thats what happens now, we get a government that most did not vote for, And we have a system that if you happen to live in a constituency which is considered a safe seat it's not worth voting. :!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This won't get rid of "safe seats", most "safe seats" already secure over 50% of the vote for "the donkey"; just make sure that marginals go to the third Party (IE LibDems). The evidence from Oz is that 80% of voters under AV, only vote for ONE candidate anyway. The bottom line on this, is that it's a lifeline to save the LibDems from electoral oblivion at the next election. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something to ponder, if AV had been the system a few years back the country could have been run by Kinnock & Ashdown. :shock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it will not get rid of all safe seats, but it will get rid of a lot of them :!:

 

Something to ponder, if AV had been the system a few years back the country could have been run by Kinnock & Ashdown.

 

Which would have been better than what we ended up with :!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kije, Nothing wrong with one man one vote.

The AV system won't get rid of the apathy, but probably create more.

It is a desperation measure, brought about by people who cannot raise the number of voters for their party by normal means, so they have to change the rules to stay viable.

Another name for cheating in my book. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which basically means any or all of them - AV or no AV! :wink: As in most General elections 30% don't vote at all, in locals 70% don't bother - such is the their level of support. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which wouldn't make any difference - if 30% don't vote or are forced to vote but spoil their ballot - that leaves 70% actually voting for a Party, if someone gets 51% of the vote, they still will only have attained around 36% of the total eligible vote - so I'm afraid there are no silver bullets on this one! :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Australia where you are forced to vote they have an average of 5.6% spoiled papers, so if people actually make it to the ballot box they normally vote :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Australia, where they have AV - 80% only vote once for the one candidate! :wink: When you start to boil this down, there is simply no system that actually delivers on the aspirations of all of the people, cos those aspirations are so diverse in the first place, and can be extemely fickle and reactive to perceptions and events. Governance by opinion poll or referendum, would arguably be more representative and democratic - but would it deliver consistency and longer term planning? :? Perhaps folk need to examine the purpose and point of various kinds of governance - is to represent a specific geographical area (constituency) or is it to represent various aspirational groupings within society (policy)? Can one really serve the other or do we need seperate political institutions to accomodate both? EG> the election of an Executive (Senate?) by direct PR (Party list system), which would be directly representative in policy terms to the proportional aspirations of voters. This would leave constituency representation to MPs in the commons, as the legislature and scrutineer of the Executive? :?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you say 80% only vote for one candidate, and it could happen here. I have nothing ageist that. The point is they have a choice we do not. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have nothing ageist that. The point is they have a choice we do not. :wink:

 

Of course you have a choice!!!!! You are allowed to vote. :roll::roll::roll::roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would make people vote, and put on the paper "Non of the above" for people who want to make a protest :wink:

 

Even talking like a European Kije. "Non". De Gaulle's favourite word. (If we had only listened.!!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Av Peter, you can vote for one person, or you can use your preference and give a second choice, The system we have at the moment does not allow that , it restricts choice, I am sure even you can work out which is more democratic. The Av plus system would be even better :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we keep voting until we get the Lib-Dems in? :roll::roll::roll:

 

Bit like Europe and the NO vote, keep going until you get it right.

 

You DO have a choice NOW.

No need to change it. Vote for who you want. Now, if we lived in Libya, there might be a need for AV.

 

Face it. None of the Parties are worth voting for, so AV won't encourage people to vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is there a "choice" Kije, if there are only three main Party candidates on the ballot - three shades of the same colour. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than 3 on the ballot paper Obs :wink:

 

Peter you can choose with Av not to put a second preference if that is your inclination. With a present system for most people it is not worth voting as we are in a safe seat, are you trying to tell me that is more democratic than Av. Av is far from being perfect but it is far better than what we have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the electoral commission booklet that came through our door makes it sound like YES is the better and fairer way and at least more people get at least 'someone' they have voted for on their slips ... so on the face of it I've changed my mind again.. possibly... or not :lol:

 

Question though... they booklet says

 

'If more people vote "yes than no" when will we start using the "alternative vote" system ?'

 

The answer given is...

 

Alternative Vote will be used AFTER a review of the boundaries in the area that each MP represents (known as their constituently) is completed. This is due to happen between 2011 and 2013.

 

At the END of the review the UK Parliament will VOTE on implementing the new boundaries. IF the new boundaries ARE implemented the 'alternative vote' system will be used for all FUTURE elections to the House of Commons.

 

SO.....what happens if more people say 'yes' than 'no' but the UK parliament vote against implementing the new boundaries in all the constituencies.. could this happen and would we still then have first past the post despite more people wanting AV !?!?!??

 

I knoew I shouldn't have read it all :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kije.....

 

how you have the front to come on here spouting all this crap about AV and "democratic" and "fair" when you are an ardent supporter of the most undemocratic edifice on the planet (The EU) is utterly beyond me.

 

How do you manage to stay at such polar oppopsites and still manage to keep a straight face!!??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

easy Baz, you are afraid of the Eu because you are afraid the British will be out voted by the continentals, you are afraid of democracy and afraid of being a minority, your not very democratic when it comes down to it :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×