I wondered what peoples thoughts here were on this little matter?
My thoughts, at this stage, is I shall be voting No.....
Sex God
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Yes or no to the AV?
last reply
164 replies
5.7k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Sex God
Might as well vote Yes, the current system sure as hell isn't doing anything for me.
Sex God
It's strange that we are allowed a referendum on AV, a topic which hardly keeps people awake with worry at night, but can't have a referendum on subjects which really do worry people, such as immigration, going to war, or capital punishment.
I don't have a very strong opinion one way or the other on AV so therefore will not bother taking part.
John
I don't have a very strong opinion one way or the other on AV so therefore will not bother taking part.
John
Quote by Ben_welshminx
I believe the current system, party based democracy is deeply flawed.
I believe voting reform is a step in the right direction.
but the AV system - as used in most of Europe - is exactly that Ben; a party based system where you vote for a list but have no direct control over who is voted in!!
The English voting system, first past the post, is as sound as any other system can be and you know who you are voting for when you cast your vote.
I don't think I have a vote in this referendum but if I did, I'd vote a resounding NO.
But I hear "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and I think that is best in this case. Don't change something just because you know or believe something needs change; only change it if you have a better alternative! AV is not better, I can assure you. Look to Europe and see the lack of decision making; the "dirty deals" done in the name of politics and the way politicians would sell their soul to make it towards the top of the "list" next time round in the elections for an easier life.
You will never rid the system of party politics. FPtP, the British Parliamentary system, elects individuals to serve as the people's representative in Parliament. AV only allows you to vote for a "list" or party or "associates in common" and your choice of representative is not respected.
An alternative might be as in the Presidential elections in France. The contenders (sponsored by a Political Party generally) fight it out in round one and then only the top two contenders in a FPtP run-off face each other. The one with more than 50% of the vote wins. It's messy and expensive (two elections taking place on consecutive weekends) but at least more than 50% of the popular vote (amongst those who express a preference at the poll) sees a definitive result. That is not quite the case for the lower elections in France where AV is used often resulting in "hung" parliaments without a clear sense of direction often leaving the President in great difficulty.
I'm not keen on the American alternative where the President is elected by an Electoral College of Governors. Witness the corrupt election of George "Dubbya" when one Governor - alledgedly - did not exactly reflect the wishes of his State.
If you think the ConDem Alliance is messy, just wait to see what happens to UK politics if AV was to be introduced.
You will never rid the system of party politics. FPtP, the British Parliamentary system, elects individuals to serve as the people's representative in Parliament. AV only allows you to vote for a "list" or party or "associates in common" and your choice of representative is not respected.
An alternative might be as in the Presidential elections in France. The contenders (sponsored by a Political Party generally) fight it out in round one and then only the top two contenders in a FPtP run-off face each other. The one with more than 50% of the vote wins. It's messy and expensive (two elections taking place on consecutive weekends) but at least more than 50% of the popular vote (amongst those who express a preference at the poll) sees a definitive result. That is not quite the case for the lower elections in France where AV is used often resulting in "hung" parliaments without a clear sense of direction often leaving the President in great difficulty.
I'm not keen on the American alternative where the President is elected by an Electoral College of Governors. Witness the corrupt election of George "Dubbya" when one Governor - alledgedly - did not exactly reflect the wishes of his State.
If you think the ConDem Alliance is messy, just wait to see what happens to UK politics if AV was to be introduced.
Sex God
i think the alternative would work fine
until the elected government took office and if such a government should be tory then the system would be labeled as flawed by those that hoped for a labour or liberal government
until the elected government took office and if such a government should be tory then the system would be labeled as flawed by those that hoped for a labour or liberal government
Sex God
Quote by GnV
But I hear "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and I think that is best in this case. Don't change something just because you know or believe something needs change; only change it if you have a better alternative! AV is not better, I can assure you. Look to Europe and see the lack of decision making; the "dirty deals" done in the name of politics and the way politicians would sell their soul to make it towards the top of the "list" next time round in the elections for an easier life.
You will never rid the system of party politics. FPtP, the British Parliamentary system, elects individuals to serve as the people's representative in Parliament. AV only allows you to vote for a "list" or party or "associates in common" and your choice of representative is not respected.
An alternative might be as in the Presidential elections in France. The contenders (sponsored by a Political Party generally) fight it out in round one and then only the top two contenders in a FPtP run-off face each other. The one with more than 50% of the vote wins. It's messy and expensive (two elections taking place on consecutive weekends) but at least more than 50% of the popular vote (amongst those who express a preference at the poll) sees a definitive result. That is not quite the case for the lower elections in France where AV is used often resulting in "hung" parliaments without a clear sense of direction often leaving the President in great difficulty.
I'm not keen on the American alternative where the President is elected by an Electoral College of Governors. Witness the corrupt election of George "Dubbya" when one Governor - alledgedly - did not exactly reflect the wishes of his State.
If you think the ConDem Alliance is messy, just wait to see what happens to UK politics if AV was to be introduced.
But it is broke - look what crap we got.
Sex God
Some confusion here re AV and Proportional Representation ?
Yes we currently have 1st Past the Post elections, the result being on several occasions we'd actually had 'minority' Governments, i.e. a government for which less than half of those people who voted actually voted for.
One long running debate has been Proportial Representation based elections, of which Alternative Vote (AV) and Single Transferable Vote (STV) are just 2 ways of doing it, so as to try and ensure that a government is form for which the majority of voters actually voted for.
(You also have Party Proportionality, Party List and Loser Delegation to name some more)
Sadly what we are being asked to consider in May is a system, or rather version (AV), only used for Parliamentary elections in 3 other countries elsewhere in the world, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Australia (with Fiji planning to scrap it).
It's interesting to note that the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Green Party, Green Party of Scotland, English Democrats, and Communist Party (to name but a few) all say that AV is not their prefered way of Voting Reform, most preferring STV.
So basically we are being asked to chose between 1st Past the Post and a version of Proportional Representation that most other countries do not use and which isn't the preference for many political groups in the UK anyway
:doh:
I'm off for a beer :cheers: (perhaps alcohol will help)
Yes we currently have 1st Past the Post elections, the result being on several occasions we'd actually had 'minority' Governments, i.e. a government for which less than half of those people who voted actually voted for.
One long running debate has been Proportial Representation based elections, of which Alternative Vote (AV) and Single Transferable Vote (STV) are just 2 ways of doing it, so as to try and ensure that a government is form for which the majority of voters actually voted for.
(You also have Party Proportionality, Party List and Loser Delegation to name some more)
Sadly what we are being asked to consider in May is a system, or rather version (AV), only used for Parliamentary elections in 3 other countries elsewhere in the world, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Australia (with Fiji planning to scrap it).
It's interesting to note that the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Green Party, Green Party of Scotland, English Democrats, and Communist Party (to name but a few) all say that AV is not their prefered way of Voting Reform, most preferring STV.
So basically we are being asked to chose between 1st Past the Post and a version of Proportional Representation that most other countries do not use and which isn't the preference for many political groups in the UK anyway
:doh:
I'm off for a beer :cheers: (perhaps alcohol will help)
HnSI must admit to being torn...I would like to see a fairer voteing system......but I am also aware this will give the fringe parties much more clout !! People such as British National Party and UK indepenance party, I can see being the main benifactors of this change, and I would not be happy with such small radical parties, haveing influence in the corridors of power !!
Sex God
Quote by Ben_welshminx
How does the proposed new system work then?
Ben,
might help, before you look at the FOR and AGAINST websites
Mind you, you've probably had, or will be getting, a leaflet through the letterbox as well
Sex God
Quote by Ben_welshminx
It will be in welsh and english since wales has a bilingual policy.
Yers HnS thats how I thought it worked so why are folk worried about minority parties getting more of a say?
Ben,
Not worried re minority parties per se, just think that the AV policy being pushed by the Lib Dems is deeply flawed * and that there are better versions of proportional representation being advocated by many other parties and used in many other countries than the AV version people will be asked to decide on in May.
*
Many Australians think it's flawed (6 out of 10 voters apparently)
Papua New Guinea have only used once
Fiji have decided to scrap it
GnV Up to the 'locals' about having things bi-lingual, so long as they all pay for it, it's up to them per se, so hopefully the local authorities in Wales will be spending even more than in England and Scotland getting the booklet translated.
Sex God
let me show you the prime minister for the the next 20 years and the last 30 years
just add a different tie for the party you want
just add a different tie for the party you want
Quote by fem_4_taboo
i think they should make it that everyone has to vote. Not on this subject but in the GE.
x fem x
No Way!!! If anything, people shouldn't be allowed to vote unless they can show, by means of a test, that they understand the political and economic philosophies of the parties standing in the elections and the implications of those philosophies for society and the economy. How many people voted for Thatcher and then complained about the prices of travel on trains after they had been privatised, or about the state of public services after she had been in power for a few years? If they had understood Conservative Party political philosophy and the Friedmanite economic philosophy then they would have known what was going to happen. In any case, no political party would make voting compulsory in the knowledge that all those who don't want to vote would vote against them in retalliation.
i suspect a large amount of people dont know all that stuff before placing a vote, and to be fair how many people have voted for a party and the party then change its plans?
too many people benefit from the outcomes of the votes but fail to take part, and too many moan but failed to vote in the first place.
maybe if it was made compulsory the schools would ensure pupils took politics seriousely and people would start to feel a part of this county rather than a consequence of it.
so many people i know feel when they are scamming the benefit system etc thats they are screwing those at the top, they dont reaslise its probally their best mate who has worked his/her arse off to pay the taxes so those at the top can pay out that benefit check.
thats just one thing, basically lots of people do not care because they didnt have to.
i also think there should be a option to re elect if they change a policy, you cant buy a hoover and not expect it to work, i dont expect my vote to be watsted on a person who doesnt do what it says either.
x fem x
too many people benefit from the outcomes of the votes but fail to take part, and too many moan but failed to vote in the first place.
maybe if it was made compulsory the schools would ensure pupils took politics seriousely and people would start to feel a part of this county rather than a consequence of it.
so many people i know feel when they are scamming the benefit system etc thats they are screwing those at the top, they dont reaslise its probally their best mate who has worked his/her arse off to pay the taxes so those at the top can pay out that benefit check.
thats just one thing, basically lots of people do not care because they didnt have to.
i also think there should be a option to re elect if they change a policy, you cant buy a hoover and not expect it to work, i dont expect my vote to be watsted on a person who doesnt do what it says either.
x fem x
Sex God
Quote by fem_4_taboo
i suspect a large amount of people dont know all that stuff before placing a vote, and to be fair how many people have voted for a party and the party then change its plans?
snip
x fem x
Every single person who votes for a part that gets into power - every last one of them.
The astonishing thing is that anyone bothers voting anymore.
Sex God
Quote by fem_4_taboo
i think they should make it that everyone has to vote. Not on this subject but in the GE.
x fem x
Fem,
Be useful for all elections, however only if they also place on all ballot papers the option at the bottom of the candidate list "None of the above" where you can place your X, i.e. I'm voting but as I don't like any of the candidates or what they stand for I'm not voting for any of them.
Bet we get some very interesting results and if None of the aboveactually get more votes than any actual candidate under what ever voting system they use (First Past the Post, AV, STV, etc.) it certainly sends a powerful message to politicos to improve what they are offering the electorate in that voting area for a mandatory re-run election 6 months later.
Quote by HnS
i think they should make it that everyone has to vote. Not on this subject but in the GE.
x fem x
Fem,
Be useful for all elections, however only if they also place on all ballot papers the option at the bottom of the candidate list "None of the above" where you can place your X, i.e. I'm voting but as I don't like any of the candidates or what they stand for I'm not voting for any of them.
Bet we get some very interesting results and if None of the aboveactually get more votes than any actual candidate under what ever voting system they use (First Past the Post, AV, STV, etc.) it certainly sends a powerful message to politicos to improve what they are offering the electorate in that voting area for a mandatory re-run election 6 months later.
actually i very much like that idea, would show them how carp they all are, or really make them work harder for the vote
x fem x
