The UK general election is expected on May 6 2010, where around 45 million eligible voters will place a single X against the political party/candidate they want to represent them for up to 5 years. With our current first past the post electoral vote system only the candidate with the most votes in each of […]
Continue Reading UK Electoral Reform – Alternative Vote System
That system is terrible.
It destroyed the Wiemer Republic in Germany due to lack of a strong Government, in nations it is used it results in poor Governments.
It allows racist politicians and parties (like the BNP!!!) to get representatives in and allowed Hitler to take control of Germany, of course that wouldn’t happen here but it shows how bad it can be, as the Communists had over 150 members in the Reichstag in November 1930.
I allso don’t like the fact 16 year olds would be allowed to vote.
So on that basis I would say the entire nation would be ruined if such a poor system was put in place.
Vote NO to AV
I have to agree Jon, the proposed system would be a very bad move for the future politics of the country, it would allow parties like the BNP to win seats based on a non majority vote as evidenced in last years EU elections.
Not saying whether I like/dislike the alternative voting system yet (despite writing the article, I’m not sure). I don’t like the current first past the post system as it doesn’t encourage people to vote, “what’s the point” attitude.
I don’t think it would result in parties like the BNP benefiting from the alternative vote system, but would like to hear the argument why you think it would? Are you thinking loads of voters would put BNP first or second in this voting system?
I think this voting system would help the Liberal Democrats the most, (not as much as proportional representation) because I believe the current Lib Dem share of the vote is understated for several reasons.
Lib Dems are currently the only party that’s a serious threat to the two party system, their support has stagnated though, I think because of the two party system, what’s the point voting Lib Dems when they never win government.
I could see many Labour and Conservative voters listing the Lib Dems as their second choice.
I wonder if there’s been any serious polls or studies as to what might happen under the alternative vote system? If Labour are seriously considering it (and it’s not just for playing the Lib Dems politically) they must believe it’s going to benefit Labour (would be political suicide otherwise).
David
AV vs First Past the Post Voting System
Just some comment from an outsider:
There is much talk about this system or that… but surely this is the wrong approach. The first step is to reach some general agreement about the degree to which seats should reflect votes… and only then consider the pros and cons of those systems that go someway to meeting such a “fair votes” criteria.
The present FPTP system quite clearly has some very unfair aspects: such as in 2005 where Labour, with only 3% more votes than the Tories, achieved nearly 25% more seats. At the other end of the spectrum, pure PR also has flaws in that it can place small parties in a position of power and continual involvement in government out of all proportion to their level of support. As with most things in life: the answer lies somewhere in between the extremes.
My view, for what it is worth is there is nothing wrong with coalition government when voting patterns dictate. The “however” is that any system should also allow for coalition governments to be voted out.
May I make a suggestion that a simple
30 : 45 : 55 rule may represent a reasonably fair target.
This target is based on the following:
30% of the vote – an expectation of a similar proportion of seats
45% of the vote – an expectation of a modest majority government
55% of the vote – an expectation of a landslide victory
The reality is that there may be no system that fully matches such criteria; but its acceptance would provide a basis to immediately exclude systems that go nowhere near achieving such results and provide a challenge to systems that approach the target to demonstrate they have other positive attributes to keep them in the mix.
Your thoughts!
A dropper of pebbles
Into still waters
Coalition Governments not a Bad Thing
This system actually makes it HARDER for the BNP. The BNP managed to gain council seats with only getting 30% of the vote due the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrat candidates all evenly split.
In the AV system, people can give their preference to the higher placed candidate in case their most preferred does poorly.
For example, if there are four candidates, your average Conservative might vote like this:
1 CON
2 LIB
3 LAB
4 BNP
in the same situation.
They don’t have to worry about helping a BNP candidate get elected because they know if the Conservative candidate comes last, their vote can be transferred to either the Liberal Democrats or Labour.
BNP Would NOT do well under AV Vote System
The Weimar Republic didn’t have Alternative Voting. They had a system of proportional representation, which is actually still used in Germany today. (The only difference is that the current system requires a party to obtain at least 5% of popular vote in order to gain representation.)
ConservativeJon appears not to have noticed – the nation is ruined. Have a look via: http://shamedagain.blogspot.com/
Germany currently has a PR list based system, we forced it on them after WW2. Quite the contrary to the poster above, PR has created a stable and strong Germany.
Now I am not a fan of the alternative voting system because it is complex, still means votes will not count and is not true PR. Only a list based system is PR. We need a true PR list based system for the commons and the Lords can then be elected on First Past the Post, and be converted to a house of representatives. They would then be our personal representatives. In this way the argument against a list based system, that of constituencies could be overcome. Furthermore the supremacy of the commons would be maintained because of the superior electoral system.
Nothing, absolutely nothing, stands above every single persons vote counting. Anything less is not democracy!
Most European countries also have some form of PR. If you want to talk about the Weimar Republic and Germany please know what you are talking about first. The reason Hitler was able to gain power had nothing to do with having an Alternative Voting System. It was actually because the Weimar Republic printed money, lied about inflation and destroyed the wealth of the middle classes and the poor whilst letting rich people wipe away their debts…. just like the housing bubble. Why do people vote BNP, because the very reason people are being ignored and feel disenfranchised!
View Comment
the nation is already ruined
Hi David,
The Alternative Vote System is not a proportional system, rather it is a preferential system. It is perhaps indicative of this that the main proponents of AVS are Liberal Democrats or Labour supporters because they would list the other party as their second preference.
This would be totally undemocratic in the UK and result in a skewing of vote outcomes to favour the larger Labour party – the Conservatives and any other party would be hopelessly outnumbered.
Personally, I would advocate a PR system, such as Mixed Member Proportional whereby national voting outcomes are reflected in the makeup of the national parliament.
For more information see an interesting blog by Simon Kaye on ATV at:
The Alternative Vote System is not a proportional system
I agree with you the Alternative Vote System post by Simon Kaye is very interesting and well worth the time reading.
I look forward to his “more academic objections” follow up post he says he’s planning to make.
David
Can I draw your attention to a system of voting which would deliver PR, has the simplicity of FPTP, maintains the single member constituency, and doesn’t require a huge change from the existing voting system?
Direct Party and Representative Voting
Despite the recent vote in the House of Commons and consequential public debate, the chances of a move to Proportional Representation for Westminster elections are remote.
Those in favour of PR cannot build a coalition. The different forms of PR vary in their ability to deliver PR, are often complex and difficult to understand, and may not be compatible with the single member constituency.
An underlying problem with the existing system is that the voter is faced with the potential dilemma of voting for the party or for the candidate. This works very heavily against independent candidates. These voting issues should be separated as follows.
To meet the demand for political renewal, we need
1 One vote for a party to form the government.
2 One vote for the Constituency MP. This could be by the FPTP system.
and all on one ballot paper – that is the only change we need in the public voting system.
A further change would be needed in Parliament where one MP one vote is ditched, and a fractional voting system introduced. The elected Government’s strength in Parliament would be determined by the first vote. In parliament each MP would exercise a fractional vote. If a party got 40% support in the ‘Government’ vote but 50% of the MPs, each of their MPs would have a vote value 0.8 Independents would have a vote value of one.
Non government bills (Free Votes) could be determined by one vote per MP.
Swipe card voting should make it foolproof and simple.
The Government would then have very precise proportional support, not in MPs but in votes. Why should it have more or less?
This system, Direct Party and Representative Voting (DPR), would have the key features of a PR system and single member constituencies.
> No longer would people be disenfranchised. Every vote would count.
> It would be easy to vote, and easy to count, and the outcomes would be quick and easy to understand.
> There need no longer be a conflict between voting for an individual or a party. You could vote for your party but not necessarily for the particular local representative.
> Yes, it would be difficult for new parties to get started – but arguably less so than at present
> It would make it easier for exceptional individuals or independents to get elected.
This system would not satisfy the ‘Strong Government’ lobby – those who want the system to throw up a big majority for the ‘winning’ party regardless of their actual democratic support. But at least the battle lines and arguments would be simplified.
Not only would this system lead to more independent MPs, it would give all MPs a measure of independence since they will have been elected as individuals rather than just party representatives.
DPR is a voting system that delivers PR, has the simplicity of FPTP, maintains the single member constituency, would make it much easier for Independent Candidates to get elected and doesn’t require a huge change from the existing voting system. It’s easy to understand, simple to implement, has no serious disadvantages.
It would make an enormous contribution to the radical reforms we need to our political system
Direct Party and Representative Voting
That DPR system looks like a very interesting proposal which would certainly encourage more people to vote. I had not come across it before.
One reason that we have had the MPs expenses scandal is that it is not really MPs that we vote for at General Elections but parties. So MPs do not feel so answerable to the electors.
This DPR would give MPs more authority in Parliament to hold Govt to account. Possibly some difficulties in appointing MPs to Select Committees but I am sure that could be overcome.
Direct Party and Representative Voting
So in an Alternative Vote System or PR, you dont actually vote for the MP, just the Party.
The Party then has carte blanche to nominate in the order they choose who gets the seat in parliament.
Some democracy that is.
Also coalition governments like in Italy, 42 in 46 years. Now that’s expensive!
You would get fringe parties popping up everywhere, the ballot paper would be a mile long after a couple of elections.
First past the post may not be perfect, but at least you can vote for your local MP and it creates more stable government.
I would prefer to see terms limits for MP’s in the Commons and Lords introduced.
View Comment
No in the Alternative Vote System it’s the same as what we have now, MPs are listed in advance of the vote and we vote for the candidate, not the party. In the Alternative Vote System we (the voter) get to make a second, third and fourth… choice and if our first choice candidate gets least votes, our vote now goes to our 2nd choice candidate, if he/she has least votes our vote goes to our 3rd choice, this continues until one candidate has over 50% of the vote.
It does not necessarily result in fringe parties (like the BNP) gaining seats. I would say it would possibly help the Lib Dems more than any other party.
In PR you are kind of right. In our EU elections if an MEP gives up his seat the party picks a replacement. For example in the general election if Nick Griffin (BNP leader and current EU MEP) won a seat (became an MP) he’d have to give up his EU seat (can’t be an MP and MEP now). The party would choose who would take his place.
With AV it’s not like that though, if an MP stands down or dies it’s a by-election and a new vote to determine who takes the seat.
David
View Comment
I am not a fan of the alternative voting system because it is complex, still means votes will not count and is not true PR. Only a list based system is PR. We need a true PR list based system for the commons. The Lords can then be elected on First Past the Post and be converted to a house of representatives. They would then be our personal representatives. In this way the argument against a list based system, that of constituencies could be overcome. Furthermore the supremacy of the commons would be maintained because of the superior electoral system. This is by far the simplest way to introduce PR and maintain constituencies.
Nothing, absolutely nothing, stands above every single persons vote counting. Anything less is not democracy!
Most European countries also have some form of PR. Germany has a list based system and is one of the strongest countires because of it. Allowing one party, and by that nature, one person, gain so much power is the very cause of the economic catastrophe in the UK. That one person, Brown, had not a clue about economics.
Why do people vote BNP, because the very reason people are being ignored and feel disenfranchised!
View Comment
Perhaps its time to ditch party politics altogether! If all MP’s had to be independents and be able to demonstrate they had lived (not just owned property) in the constituency they wish to represent for a minimum of 5 years. The PM and cabinet could then be selected by a fair assessment system based on their skills, abilities and experience for the post as required for any other job. For example, the PM would be selected following a paper sift through interview by a panel consisting of the Queen, the head of the Civil Service, the most experienced British Ambassador etc. The Minister for Defence likewise by a panel comprising the heads of the 3 Armed Services and the senior MOD Civil Servant. They would then be appointed for the full term of a parliament with proviso built in to remove them in case of poor performance, illegal activity etc. This way we would not see policy dictated by outdated party ideology and we might get proper long term strategies untainted by the desire to seek re-election.
View Comment
wow if i had to vote for a puppet on strings they better at least do tricks and make me go hahaha aftter all vote this guy or that guy your still stuck with counsil that tears your house and buissness down takes your mony gives nothing back cant take them to court they will just prolong it till your broke in court fees and with your mony buy monuments and brag a bout the little tiny things they do and wipe the awful things they do to get thees lil things under the rug
i love this country ive been here 9 years maried an english woman and it costed me lota mony to be here visa resedencey e.c.t since ive been here my family was always in the middle of the bad end of government mony makeing scheems its a real pretty country but one thing i miss about usa is you dont have to register to vote this sends a message, if registar is down, means gov lost the interest in the people and we the people are the gov,system, needs a compleat dushe to get the public back involved here i dont have to register as im a usa citezen but english residnt perminent but if born english wife didnt register to vote for the people that stole our hard ohnest working life from us they would freez our bank accounts taken our mony once again how is this considdered a free countrywhen you dont have the choice to get evan by not registering to vote and send a message the system is not working for the people that are and paying there salerys
altho atleast 75 percent atleast of englands population is blue collor working man paying the highest taxes in the world and coming here from usa the differences is in usa history the unions won here gove stept in margie made it so work is like slavory give the companys the cheap slave labor they want or they will leave to where taxes are more reasonabal and we will have no work so 70 percent or 75 are over worked phyisicaly so yea hospitals coverd with tax mony only if ur case is with in reason of buget or they prolong the desision till you die if cost to high but nursing homes are not freee and with slave like work enviorments where safty only is if its not to exspensive is nessisary when safty its self is top mony in any aspect may not aply you sure are gona be in a nursing home and that cost more then you ever made as a slave so you did it for nothing so margie thatccers party is only worst then worst theres no choice just bendover and surender to hell
cause at the end of the day margie thatchers party is all company owners rich people witch may i point out are the minority here have there problems and poor people have our problems witch are the majority they dont under stand our problems because our problems are there probloms because we are wigets that make them mony with a mind and a mouth so we are ther problem but moral of the storry here is no mater who you wasted your vote and time witch time is mony , on here your gona get raped and its all your falt because you voted 4 it
you may need to study my artical til it makes sence i had a head injury at 3 years old so have tbi almoste like dislexia but worst the brains on hyper speed but if your good and study what i say you will see every politition reading this thank ing god that i have this problem as they will say if this guy could get his words across right he would be very dangorourss how ever im only speeking how the average citezen of every race collor creed feals in thees very hard times that were brought on us all over the world by just 1 vote that we had no choice in it didnt take a rocket sicencetist to realize with 911 and iraq it would take a woman or a black man in next lead seat .for usa to keep internatinal backking involved, im sure the country usa, said lets find a black guy, we can pull the strings on, as in my time ,black and woman as presadent ,not possibal, in a nation ruled by kkk and neo natzis but it happend ,for the sake of usa. what can we do 4 the sake of england, maby let a blue collor factory worker call shots and not be told no cant do that ,im loosing mony, by some rich company owner/gov, its ok do what you think the slaves need, lets get enland back on king hill and when we are there ,then ill wory bout making top pound again and try beat you in next election so at end lets stop riping off england and just refurbish what we raped ok
lets worrry about our england then worry about our selves
View Comment