A balanced discussion of AV

[watervole]

A discussion by the Political Studies Association with no party bias on AV looks at all the points on both sides (thanks Nwhyte and Communicator)

It's very even and I found it an interesting read.

It also cleared up a point that I'd been misled on.  If you want to vote in the traditional FPTP in an AV world, you can just list your first preference on the ballot paper and leave it at that.  You don't have to list further preferences unless you want to.  (In Australia, I believe you have to list them all in order, but that's not the way the UK will be doing it)

I'll be voting for AV, though the study makes it clear that AV is not actually going to make any dramatic changes to our political landscape.

Comments

[rockwell-666.livejournal.com]

A very good analysis of the systems.

And yes, AIUI, in Australia you have to rank *all* candidates or your ballot counts as "spoiled" (which, given that the Australians have compulsory voting is their way of protesting or saying "none of the above").

Also their votes are counted by machine but ours will be done by the traditional hand-counting method so the claim by the No campaign that we will have to spend £130m for voting machines as part of their lie that introducing AV will cost £250m is shown to be bogus along with them including the £90m cost of the Referendum in that figure which would have been spent whether we get AV or stay with FPTP.

[steverogerson.livejournal.com]

I've switched during the campaign from being in favour to being against to back to being in favour again.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

I'm in favour, largely because it allows people to put the party they actually want first. eg. I can put Green, then Lib Dem.

My preference for Green is invisible under FPTP.

[del-c.livejournal.com]

During the American universal health care debate I noticed that the "No 2 Universal Health Care" people in America had scare stories of what might happen, while the "Yes 2 Universal Health Care" people had the testimony of everyone in the world where they actually have universal health care.

During this debate, the "No2AV" campaign have had scare stories of what might happen, while the "Yes2AV" people have had the testimony of everyone in the world where they actually have AV. I think I should take the hint.

[dev-iant.livejournal.com]

What I don't get is why anyone in a safe constituency, who supports a party other than the one in power, would vote No.

But then this is one of those issues I feel very strongly about.