AV referendum.

[CanisMajor]

Just watching the Andrew Marr Show and the PM said that AV is used only by Australia, Fiji and Papua New Guinnea. So do we really want a system that is so unnattactive? Apparently to make this work Australia has made voting a legal requirement. Surely any system where a stick is needed if flawed. Sorry if this has been discussed already,I'm a recent joiner.

[rojash]

Compulsory voting in Australia is completely unconnected to the voting method used. Australia's attitude is that you have a civic duty to participate in the democratic process.

[toalisi]

A recent poll showed that most Aussies did not like the AV system.

[MarkRae]

^^ Correct, and Fiji are in the process of returning to the first past the post system...

[boxtops]

... so I hope we don't get it here.

[CanisMajor]

fair enough rojash but it could be argued that democracy means choice, even the choice to not vote. It smacks of a sort of dictat, "you will participate in democracy!"

[toalisi]

hear hear

[MarkRae]

Indeed, Boxy. All this nonsensical advertising about "make your MP work harder" is, frankly, preposterous, IMO. MPs will continue to be as hard-working and honourable (or free-loading and corrupt) under AV as they ever were...

[MarkRae]

My opinion on that, CM, is that if you forgo your democratic right to vote then you are not entitled to complain about the elected MP if he/she turns out to be not to your liking...

[venator]

AV or PR is part of the Lib Dem religion.

If there's a no vote, I just hope there won't be another referendum next year.

We saw that when Ireland didn't "get it right" and the EU made them try again.

There should be a rule that you can't repeat a referendum for 20 years at least!

[toalisi]

I was applauding boxtops but my post appeared out of place!

[IggyB]

i still think its a bit rich for Cameron to complaint about AV along those lines when it was that voting system that was used to elect him as leader of the Tory party (also used to elect Boris Johnson as the major of London)

I really think it is a first step in making the voting system in this country fairer and will offer a line line to those people trapped in areas that are consistently held by the same party even though they don't represent 50% of the community.

It should be remembered that the AV rules only kick in if there is no party with 50% of the vote - surely it can't be a bad think to try to divide the power a little bit when a party can't even get half the votes?

[mike11111]

If FPTP had been used then on the figures Boris Johnson would still have won. Cameron failed to get 50% amongst MPs. He was elected by a large majority of party members who were offered a choice of only two candidates.

[whiskeryron]

I disagree with most of you but my attitude is still why should we put up with the present system whereby the electorate are governed by a party who have been selected by a minority of voters, I think that whatever you think about A/V it's time to try something else.Ron.

[Mampara]

The Labour wanted David Miliband but via AV got ED!

[Mampara]

Should have been Labour Party ^^

[colinatyeo]

Re AV
Fiji do use it, but are thinking of dumping it
Australia uses it, but 60% of voters do not agree with it
This really leaves Papua New Guinea as sole supportive users - but for how
much longer!!!!!!!!!

[venator]

Was Cameron elected by AV?
Was it AV exactly as proposed?
Can anyone post a definitive link about this?

Otherwise, it stinks of panic by the no campaign.

[venator]

Sorry, meant yes campaign panic !!!!

[MarkRae]

I find your answer puzzling, Ron. FPTP is concerned with individual candidates, not collective votes. E.g.

Candidate A - 40%
Candidate B - 30%
Candidate C - 20%
Candidate D - 10%

So, candidate A is elected because he/she received more votes than any other INDIVIDUAL candidate. It's clearly true that 60% of the voters in the above scenario didn't want Candidate A to win. The problem is that their vote was split among the other candidates.

AV doesn't actually solve that. It just uses a mathematical algorithm whereby the least popular candidate is discarded and their votes redistributed. This process is then repeated until one candidate is allocated more than 50% of the overall votes. At this stage, the candidate who received the most number of "first-choice" votes is HIGHLY UNLIKELY to be the winner. Under AV, the votes of the least popular candidate can play a major role in deciding who wins the election.

FPTP may not be the best system, but AV is just farcical, IMO...

[colinatyeo]

I am going to put NO as my first choice on the referendum
with YES as my second choice!