It leads to too many hung parliaments and costs a fortune to implement (You will lose the overnight election results as they will more likely take a week or so).
FPTP can also lead to hung parliaments and long delays in results 
Personally, I think hung parliaments can be a good thing. Can you imagine what the Tories would be doing if they had a majority?
, but the message that there were x% of Green votes available would get through.
d'you think?
I'm a bit more cynical than that
I wonder how much credence the current government give to the views of the 41% that didn't vote for either Ant or Dec?
In two horse races - under AV - the second vote will nearly always go to the Libs, not because anyone actually wants them, purely out of hatred for the other party, so just more tactical voting really
The Electoral Reform Society says that if the 2010 general election had used AV there would be a slight reduction in the number of Tory MPs, a slight increase for Labour and the Lib Dems, and no increase for non-mainstream candidates.
Impossible to tell as people weren't voting using AV.
Personally, I think hung parliaments can be a good thing. Can you imagine what the Tories would be doing if they had a majority?
Well the Libs are hardly holding them back are they ?
Let's not make the mistake of thinking that this is anything other than a Tory govt.
Why did Nick Clegg cross the road?
Because he said he wouldn't.
emma82 - Member
oh, I'm conservative though so perhaps I ought to vote no? Im confused again now
It's not a party political issue, but I have to ask...why?
AV will give me the chance to not only vote for who I DO want to win but also for who I DON'T want to win by simply ranking them last or just not ranking them at all. I like that. This is why BNP don;t like it as it will give the 90% (made up) of constituents who think they are a bunch of racist thugs the opportunity to make sure they don't even get a look n by not even ranking them at all- All while still voting for who they DO want by giving them a '1'.
I'll be voting YES as in my view it's giving me, the voter, more power.
Ideally the referendum would be an AV format vote with FPTP, AV and PR being the options allowing all those inc myself that want PR a chance to register their preference before voting AV. No matter what your intentions, a no vote to AV will be seen as a vote to keep FPTP. England is so ingrained in the 2 party system that PR is too alien atm.
Give it a few decades of AV and coalition politics and views will change one way or another. The key though is to get AV, however flawed, now which will then let the electorate vote their true intentions before a compromised tactical one.
It would be interesting to see the regional breakdown of votes cast in a 3 way FPTP/AV/PR referendum within the Union to see how the forms of PR already in use in regional government/assembly are perceived.
My MP (ToryBoy aka Michael Gove) was wheeled in from god knows where to get a safe seat so he could be one of Dave's cabinet chums. He knows nothing of the area, had probably never been here before and will probably be gone as soon as he falls from grace for whatever dodgy reason the tabloids uncover. How is that any different to mogrim's PR situation?
It is different. Mr Gove can only stand your seat. If everyone hates him so much in your town (not taking your own prejudices aside) then he won't get elected, full stop.
In PR mandelson would just be at the top of NuNuLabours 'list' and you'd never get rid of him in any way shape or form.
And do you not think any Labour MPs are dropped into 'safe' seats?
d'you think?
I've seen the good showing of the Greens in the (PR) European given as a reason why the Tories really went for the green vote.
It's always the losing parties that advocate change ... 
...apart from the BNP. I don't see them winning much and they are well behind the no campaign.
*reads all the above*
*gives in*
*becomes an anarchist*
It leads to too many hung parliaments and costs a fortune to implement (You will lose the overnight election results as they will more likely take a week or so).Why will it cost a fortune to implement? We already use STV in Scottish (all?) local council elections, and a form of PR in Devolved Parliament elections. These are not hugely expensive to implement and can be electronically counted to give results in similar timescales to old fashioned human counts.
I'm still undecided. If I vote no will that be taken as I don't want reform in any shape as I do. But if I vote yes it's unlikely we'll get another chance to change it again in the near future.If the outcome is no to AV it will be decades before the question can be considered again (its just not credible to go back to the electorate all the time with referenda asking similar questions). If the outcome is yes to AV then it leaves the door open for a new form of politics to review its success (and problems) after a few terms (as e.g. happens with devolution) and the potential to improve the format further.
chewkw - MemberIt's always the losing parties that advocate change ...
Yep, it's really surprising that the people who benefit from the obvious unfairness of the current system are in favour of keeping it
Wow, bless you all but i should have stopped with Spooky on the first page, it all sounded so simple and now i don't know what to do 
Why waste your time on politics, no matter what you vote it doesn't mean jack shit!
Name one government that when voted out wasn't shown to be utterly useless and incompetent 
Politicians are a bunch if thieving lying scumbags! that people still debate politics and by into it at all, to me is beyond madness.
Don't even waste you time with it, just find something enjoyable to do with the time you would have wasted, playing a game that the rich and powerful dictate the rules too!
All politicians are bullshitters, and all politics is bullshit!
A world leader who's actions for me sum up the mentality and philosophy of all politicians 
How to vote on this voting thing......it all sounded so simple and now i don't know what to do
I always thought giving the vote to women was a daft idea.
It was bad enough giving it to uneducated male members of the toiling classes. Sometimes I truly despair.
Can't you ask your other half or father to explain it to you ? 
chewkw - MemberIt's always the losing parties that advocate change ...
Yep, it's really surprising that the people who benefit from the obvious unfairness of the current system are in favour of keeping it
Wasn't it Marx [Karl that is] who encouraged us to enquire "who benefits" when change is sought to enable us to understand the reason for it?
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
