What will you be voting in the Voting Reform Referendum?

[Hecktix]

So, big day is tomorrow! Local Elections and the Voting Reform referendum, this thread however is just about the referendum.

Those of you who do not know, a referendum is being held on May 5 (tomorrow) on whether we should change the voting system in the UK from the current "First past the post" system which means the party with the most votes wins to the "Alternative Voting" system, a system where second and third preference votes are accounted for to ensure a party can only win with over 50% of the vote.

Why are we having this? Well because the Lib Dems want it and the Lib Dems are in the coalition, part of their coalition agreement with the tories was a voting reform referendum. However note that it is a referendum and I'm pretty sure even if the vote is a 'Yes' it might not go further.

David Cameron and the Conservative Party are part of the "No to AV" campaign, Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems are in full support of the "Yes to AV" campaign however the Labour Party, are split with leader Ed Miliband supporting AV however a lot of Labour party members disagree with this.

UKIP appear to be in favour of AV (from what I can see in their manifesto) and the BNP are strictly against AV in favour of proportional representation. The Green Party support the "Yes" campaign.

What will you vote? Or if you can't, what would you vote?

This is probably the most unbiased video I have seen if you are just looking for an explanation of the systems:

http://www.youtube.com/user/UniversityofSurrey#p/c/CEA9D6D96665D470/1/F3ahU0gsy-0Here is a video (quite funny) posted by the "No to AV" campaign (http://www.no2av.org/):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-obZ9OG_XKA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E19pmc-Jhpo&feature=related

And here are the details of the "Yes" campaign (http://www.yestofairervotes.org):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADJ6sQMBp8M

http://www.youtube.com/user/fairervotes?blend=22&ob=5#p/a/u/0/Jm5IBhrq_PU

[beth]

i am voting labour in the local votes, and voting no to a.v because i don't think it's a reliable system.

[dirrty]

i would be voting for AV, but i lost my postal card so i doubt i will be voting lol.

[Hecktix]

I will be voting no to AV for reasons quite similar to that in the first no2av video I posted, I do not believe "second preference" is good enough to catapult someone into winning an election.

[Conservative,]

If I could vote I'd be voting Conservative (because they have a nearly 60% majority in my constituency - no point voting anyone else really) and NO to AV because
A) It's a waste of public money which could fund hospitals/schools/police etc.
B) Proportional Representation is what I'd rather have. It's the fairest in my view. Some people view AV as a step towards PR, however I disagree - get the whole thing or nothing. Don't settle for a very poor alternative.
C) It's unreliable. 3 countries in the WORLD use it. Australia WANT to get rid of it see here (http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/poll-shows-support-for-electoral-reform-20101015-16mks.html) Fiji ARE getting rid of it. So it's not really the best one to use.

[Mathew]

The Right Honourable Alan B'stard in the first video sounds a lot like the Labour Party.

Obviously I can't vote, but it would be a no to AV for me. It's a waste of money and FPTP has been good enough for the past goodness knows how many years. The person who gains the most amount of votes should be the "winner", so I think it's absolutely stupid to start looking at 2nd, 3rd and 4th place votes. It's totally unrepresentative and silly - only introduced because the Lib Dems are such a hide-away party and have pretty much ****** up the next election.

[beth]

to add to my post: i think alot of people are pro-av just because they want change and progress, and progress for progress' sake is not necessarily right. there's a reason the two main parties (labour and conservative) are hugely against it. i mean, i hate to agree with the tories, makes me feel a little sick.

[Conservative,]

to add to my post: i think alot of people are pro-av just because they want change and progress, and progress for progress' sake is not necessarily right. there's a reason the two main parties (labour and conservative) are hugely against it. i mean, i hate to agree with the tories, makes me feel a little sick.

To be fair - Labour are split on it - Red Ed wants AV. Tories are the only main party solidly against it.

[Hecktix]

To be fair - Labour are split on it - Red Ed wants AV. Tories are the only main party solidly against it.

edit: o i didnt see you said main party :P

[beth]

To be fair - Labour are split on it - Red Ed wants AV. Tories are the only main party solidly against it.

70/30 labour split against.

[Rozi]

If I could vote (which the YES to AV assumed I could as they sent me a letter, and to everyone else in the house to :|) I would probably vote no.

[Conservative,]

If I could vote (which the YES to AV assumed I could as they sent me a letter, and to everyone else in the house to :|) I would probably vote no.

The irony in that makes me lol.

[Chippiewill]

I won't vote... because I can't.

But if I could I'd say Yes because I believe in a fair voting system for a democratic government.

[Mathew]

But if I could I'd say Yes because I believe in a fair voting system for a democratic government.
As the video clearly pointed out, a democracy means every person gets one vote each. I hardly think it's fair that some people will get "more of a say" because they opted to tick more boxes. It needs to be standardised, which the FPTP system does best.

[Red]

well im not even getting to vote cause im back at uni waa but no to av :)

[buttons]

guys in the referendum is it like 4 boxes and you have to vote them in importance?
um i'm voting yes only cause my politics lecturer told me to aha & then SNP ofc

[Conservative,]

guys in the referendum is it like 4 boxes and you have to vote them in importance?
um i'm voting yes only cause my politics lecturer told me to aha & then SNP ofc

Voting yes 'because my politics lecturer told me to' is the worst excuse. That's even more of an excuse to vote no tbh. ;)

[buttons]

oooh stop me

[Inseriousity.]

Personally I think it's disgusting that the words "safe seat" is even a politicial term. Most of the Labour people against it, I have noticed, are in what one could call a 'safe seat' because they can basically sit on their backside doing nothing because people vote for tradition etc. If the AV system stops that then I'm all for it.

[Hecktix]

Personally I think it's disgusting that the words "safe seat" is even a politicial term. Most of the Labour people against it, I have noticed, are in what one could call a 'safe seat' because they can basically sit on their backside doing nothing because people vote for tradition etc. If the AV system stops that then I'm all for it.

That's the thing though, Mike it probably wouldn't stop safe seats for the Labour and Conservative parties as most of the "safe seats" are called "safe seats" as they get a fair majority anyway.

[Conservative,]

Personally I think it's disgusting that the words "safe seat" is even a politicial term. Most of the Labour people against it, I have noticed, are in what one could call a 'safe seat' because they can basically sit on their backside doing nothing because people vote for tradition etc. If the AV system stops that then I'm all for it.


That's the thing though, Mike it probably wouldn't stop safe seats for the Labour and Conservative parties as most of the "safe seats" are called "safe seats" as they get a fair majority anyway.

Ditto what Oli said. Safe seats are seats which they will win regardless because they have substantial support. Even if AV comes in, those seats are where nearly all the time they get 50% + of the votes, so it won't change much.

[Shar]

I have no idea what to vote for. AV is a majority system and it won't be a big change from FPTP anyway..

[Hecktix]

I have no idea what to vote for. AV is a majority system and it won't be a big change from FPTP anyway..

Do the right thing and vote no! Even Ann Widdecombe agrees! Good to hear the crazy ***** talking sense for once:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLBDkZNORXA

[jam666]

I can vote and will glady be going down to my polling station in the morning to vote NO to AV. As you can imagine most torys are against it and being one myself, I'm also against this ridiculous proposal by clegg and co. I will enjoy watching the result and will laugh out loud when I see the look on both cleggs and red ed's face. VOTE NO to AV!

[Hecktix]

I can vote and will glady be going down to my polling station in the morning to vote NO to AV. As you can imagine most torys are against it and being one myself, I'm also against this ridiculous proposal by clegg and co. I will enjoy watching the result and will laugh out loud when I see the look on both cleggs and red ed's face. VOTE NO to AV!

I doubt Miliband will be massively bothered, he can't really not support AV as it'd be hypocritical since it was he who won the Labour Leadership election on 2nd, 3rd and 4th preference votes over his brother who had more first choice votes.

YouGov poll yesterday showed a significant margin for No to AV - I think the major question is going to be what will happen to the coalition, Lib Dems won't be happy, but they had their referendum.

[jam666]

YouGov poll yesterday showed a significant margin for No to AV - I think the major question is going to be what will happen to the coalition, Lib Dems won't be happy, but they had their referendum.

Simple, they will put up and shut up. Someone needs to remind them just how many seats they won in the election which I believe was 57, when compared to 307 from the Conservatives. If they decide to leave the coalition then they will be committing political suicide as I doubt they would even get 10% of the votes nationally.

[Hecktix]

Simple, they will put up and shut up. Someone needs to remind them just how many seats they won in the election which I believe was 57, when compared to 307 from the Conservatives. If they decide to leave the coalition then they will be committing political suicide as I doubt they would even get 10% of the votes nationally.

I think the Lib Dems committed political suicide a long time a go :P

[Conservative,]

If the coalition falls, we'd have to have a re-election. Tbh a "NO" to AV might be a good time to bow out of the coalition for them. I mean, although they will be absolutely destroyed in the inevitable election, it may save them in the long wrong.

[Hecktix]

If the coalition falls, we'd have to have a re-election. Tbh a "NO" to AV might be a good time to bow out of the coalition for them. I mean, although they will be absolutely destroyed in the inevitable election, it may save them in the long wrong.

yeah but then we'd be in a worse position than we were in after the 2010 GE, I still can't see any party getting an overall majority and if the Lib Dems were out of the question one of the only plausible options would be a ConLab coalition which would be so bad for the country as they'd never agree on anything, unless the Lib Dems did still get votes and there was a LabLib coalition, that really would be an interesting one to see :P Nah Lib Dems will cling on as long as they can, well when I say Lib Dems I mean Clegg and his cronies in the cabinet. I could almost guaruntee Clegg won't be leading the Lib Dems through their next GE. If the Lib Dems leave the coalition it'll be through LD vote of no confidence, not Clegg's choice.

[jam666]

There is one element of the whole campaign for both sides of the av referendum and local elections thats very weird and thats the hypocracy of the labour party. Just the other day red ed was trying to flaunt DC by saying "Broken Promise after Broken Promise".. oh how the hyocracy cat crawls out of the closet as people must surely have short term memory loss if they can't see who just over a year ago was part of a decade of broken promises for blair and brown and played a roll in one of the biggest if not the biggest financial crisis that this country has ever seen. I really can't understand how people can justify supporting a ship that sailed long ago. (this is not based on party politics, its simply based on fact)

[-:Undertaker:-]

Neither system is proportional so I won't be voting for either of them, besides, there's no obligation for me to vote what-so-ever for either system.


There is one element of the whole campaign for both sides of the av referendum and local elections thats very weird and thats the hypocracy of the labour party. Just the other day red ed was trying to flaunt DC by saying "Broken Promise after Broken Promise".. oh how the hyocracy cat crawls out of the closet as people must surely have short term memory loss if they can't see who just over a year ago was part of a decade of broken promises for blair and brown and played a roll in one of the biggest if not the biggest financial crisis that this country has ever seen. I really can't understand how people can justify supporting a ship that sailed long ago. (this is not based on party politics, its simply based on fact)

They both break most of their promises every single time they are elected yet you both accuse each other of it every election and then continue to vote for them in your millions. The same will continue to happen in the near future and nothing will change unless you stop voting for them.

[Ajthedragon]

My parents are voting for the conservatives and no to av. :)

The last time Labour was on our council we racked up the worst debts of any East Anglia council and had to have cuts similar to those of now. :P So I (when I can) will never vote for them. They do it time and time again.

[Agnostic Bear]

I'm voting Conservative / Yes because a) I understand how economics work and b) I think I'd genuinely like to see what'd happen after.

I have been CHOSEN FOR A POSTAL VOTE so I'll walk up the road and hand that in later.

[Catzsy]

I will be voting 'yes' to AV. We have a watered down version in Wales. I feel it does give the smaller parties a say and also if in a safe labour/conservative seat many of the peoples' votes will never have counted - in this way it will. It is not as good as proportional representation but maybe it could be a first step that will be improved upon at a later date. It is better than nothing and better than 'first past the post' IMHO. I have also done a postal vote and sent it in the post! :P

[Conservative,]

I will be voting 'yes' to AV. We have a watered down version in Wales. I feel it does give the smaller parties a say and also if in a safe labour/conservative seat many of the peoples' votes will never have counted - in this way it will. It is not as good as proportional representation but maybe it could be a first step that will be improved upon at a later date. It is better than nothing and better than 'first past the post' IMHO. I have also done a postal vote and sent it in the post! :P

Thing is though, it won't. "Safe" seats are seats that have an overwhelming majority (normally 55-60+%) which means they would win in AV just as easily as in FPTP.

Also, AV is NOT a step towards PR. AV is simply a waste of money and resources. Whether we have AV or not, the decision of a referendum for PR will rest on the shoulders of Labour or Conservative party because they will still be the only parties getting voted in (but more regularly having to make deals with minority parties to get into power) and that won't (unfortunately) happen unless there is a radical change in ideals from both parties. Sorry, but AV is pointless.

[Fez]

Can't vote but would vote NO and UKIP, there's not a Pirate candidate in my area.

Mother is voting NO and LABOUR as the local MP recently moved my grandma's housing priority up and personally recommended a house to offer on, which she took up and is now happily living.

ALSO

If you think AV is fairer, think again, people who tick more than one box get more of a vote portion.
If you think it's a step towards PR, it's not, it's towards a preferential (not proportional) vote where your opinion does not matter.

No to AV, No to FPTP, YES to PLPR (PR method).

[FlyingJesus]

The only person I know voting a yes for AV who's actually into politics is a guy who also thinks that positive discrimination is a good thing and that total socialism is fair

[Catzsy]

Thing is though, it won't. "Safe" seats are seats that have an overwhelming majority (normally 55-60+%) which means they would win in AV just as easily as in FPTP.

Also, AV is NOT a step towards PR. AV is simply a waste of money and resources. Whether we have AV or not, the decision of a referendum for PR will rest on the shoulders of Labour or Conservative party because they will still be the only parties getting voted in (but more regularly having to make deals with minority parties to get into power) and that won't (unfortunately) happen unless there is a radical change in ideals from both parties. Sorry, but AV is pointless.

Agreed that some seats would still be safe however, ' a safe seat' is not defined by % it is defined with those having a 15,000 majority. Our voters are pretty apathetic and this might just get more out to vote. Will be interesting to see. You or I cannot say that AV is pointless or that it might lead to PR - that is for hostory to decide. Lets face it who would have thought the two factions in Palestine would sign an agreement. It does not pay to be too fixed in your opinions. Let the party begin! I will be up all night. :D

[Technologic]

The only person I know voting a yes for AV who's actually into politics is a guy who also thinks that positive discrimination is a good thing and that total socialism is fair

Bahaha. Same here, he struts around wearing a hammer and sickle.

Damned Socialists

[Sarah]

I voted yes (mainly because of the reasons Rosie outlined).


I will be voting 'yes' to AV. We have a watered down version in Wales. I feel it does give the smaller parties a say and also if in a safe labour/conservative seat many of the peoples' votes will never have counted - in this way it will. It is not as good as proportional representation but maybe it could be a first step that will be improved upon at a later date. It is better than nothing and better than 'first past the post' IMHO. I have also done a postal vote and sent it in the post! :P

[Kittysoft]

I voted YES and for the Tories (No Lib Dem or UKIP in my area)

I voted yes because every MP should have the support of 50% of their constituency, and it also helps keep unpopular extremists out of politics.

[Jordy]

it also helps keep unpopular extremists out of politics.No it doesn't. It gives "unpopular" parties the chance. And by unpopular I mean those with not many votes, yet they can some how end up influencing the final outcome with AV.

Frankly it isn't possible for an MP to have support of 50% of their constituency rly, hence why it's best settling for what the majority want (FPTP ;)).

It's highly likely no will win anyway, thankfully may I add.

[Conservative,]

I voted YES and for the Tories (No Lib Dem or UKIP in my area)

I voted yes because every MP should have the support of 50% of their constituency, and it also helps keep unpopular extremists out of politics.

you'd vote Lib Dem over Tory? o.o

And actually, AV gives extremists a chance. (due to the 2nd/3rd/4th choice thing)

[Catzsy]

you'd vote Lib Dem over Tory? o.o

And actually, AV gives extremists a chance. (due to the 2nd/3rd/4th choice thing)

Well I wouldn't mind seeing a couple of UKIP. I agree with them quite a bit on the EU farce. Might make Parliament a bit more interesting.

[Conservative,]

Well I wouldn't mind seeing a couple of UKIP. I agree with them quite a bit on the EU farce. Might make Parliament a bit more interesting.

Vote UKIP (Y) Finally an agreement between me & you in this forum :P

[Mathew]

YouGov poll yesterday showed a significant margin for No to AV - I think the major question is going to be what will happen to the coalition, Lib Dems won't be happy, but they had their referendum.
It was also reported that an UrbanLife poll suggested Yes to AV was taking the lead, so I wouldn't count your chickens! :P

The problem with this is that I fear people won't bother leaving the house in order to vote on changing the system. The majority of people most likely take the stance of "there's nothing wrong with the current system so I'm not gonna vote to change it," hence not moving from their house. On the other hand, people may vote in their local election and think "there's nothing wrong with this" so just vote to keep it the same. Time will tell, but I think AV is a stupid system due to the fact some people will have two votes, whereas others will have one. That isn't democracy.


Neither system is proportional so I won't be voting for either of them, besides, there's no obligation for me to vote what-so-ever for either system.
If you don't vote you can't complain, which you do seem to spend all your time doing anyway.. ;)

The only way to get a true representation in a General Election is to make the vote compulsory for everyone, just like the census. That way, you can be certain that those who "don't vote" are being truly represented, and we don't have moaning politicians (oh, just like the Lib Dems) who are crying over FPTP being "unfair."


Well I wouldn't mind seeing a couple of UKIP. I agree with them quite a bit on the EU farce. Might make Parliament a bit more interesting.
Quite right. I do think Parliament is too largely populated with the two main parties and it would be nice to see some variation once in a while, just to see what they can offer and what change they bring about. There's virtually no chance of UKIP getting in power because people simply aren't knowledgeable enough about their policies (despite Dan's constant preaching :P), but it would be nice to have a couple, just to bring up a few of their more plausible alternatives.

[GommeInc]

I voted yes as I can see the benefits of such a system, even though I know it won't win the vote - loads of people are against it :P

And no, it wouldn't give extremists the chance - they need votes for that, and you're assuming people will actually vote for these parties in the first place.

[-:Undertaker:-]

If you don't vote you can't complain, which you do seem to spend all your time doing anyway.. :P

Oh but I can, the choice that I want is not there - therefore there is no need for me to vote for either system. If I took that view in elections, i'd end up picking between Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Conservative and then I truly wouldn't be able to complain because knowing how identical and to put it simply, dreadful they are, i'd be voting them into office and keeping their dying parties alive.

George Carlin sums it up perfectly at 1:35, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk *contains bad language*


The only way to get a true representation in a General Election is to make the vote compulsory for everyone, just like the census. That way, you can be certain that those who "don't vote" are being truly represented, and we don't have moaning politicians (oh, just like the Lib Dems) who are crying over FPTP being "unfair."

The option not to vote is just as important as the right to vote, in most dictatorships for example you have to vote (even if there is a non-choice) otherwise you are in serious trouble. If UKIP weren't standing for example in my local area or I just wasn't happy with anybody standing, why should I vote? Now as for the issue of FPTP, it is unfair. In theory a small party could get 10% or even 20% of the vote and not recieve any representation in parliament. In the General Election for example, UKIP polled at 920,334 votes and ended up with 0/650 seats - The DUP polled at 168,216 votes and ended up with a total of 8/650 seats.

A quick look at the European Elections in 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2009_%28United_Kingd om%29) under proportional representation show just how quickly PR ends tribalism and can be a game changer, or even the Finnish General election a few weeks ago can be used as an example with the True Finns soaring.

Fair? I think not.

[dirrty]

If you don't vote you can't complain, which you do seem to spend all your time doing anyway.. ;)
eurgh, this is the one thing that pisses me off the most when it comes to voting. it seriously grinds my gears. someone said that to me when i said i wasn't sure who i was voting for last year so i said i probably wouldn't vote as i didn't really wanna vote willynilly (i did vote in the end nevertheless) and i just had a fatass go at him. people can complain about whatever they desire, and just because they refrain from voting doesn't remove their freedom of speech in regards to what's occurring. hell, i'd complain even more.

[Conservative,]

PR is the way forward imo.

If that had been in the last election the following would've occured:

Conservative: 235
Labour: 188
Lib Dem: 150
UKIP: 20
BNP: 12
SNP: 11
Green: 6
Democractic Union: 4
Sinn Fein: 4
Plaid Cymru: 4
Social Democratic & Labour Party: 3
Ulster Conservatives and Unionists - New Force: 2
English Democrats: 1
Other: 10

[Mathew]

Oh but I can, the choice that I want is not there - therefore there is no need for me to vote for either system. If I took that view in elections, i'd end up picking between Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Conservative and then I truly wouldn't be able to complain because knowing how identical and to put it simply, dreadful they are, i'd be voting them into office and keeping their dying parties alive.
You're not having a say at all, so how can anyone know that you're displeased..? You're just blending in with the rest of the people who can't be bothered to leave their house on election day. People fought for a democracy; feel guilty ;)

Oh, and why could you only vote Lab / Lib / Con? UKIP stand in your local area, do they not?


The option not to vote is just as important as the right to vote, in most dictatorships for example you have to vote (even if there is a non-choice) otherwise you are in serious trouble.
This is the only way to get real proportional representation in the country. I might not want to reveal personal information in the census but I have to, are you saying we're becoming a dictatorship? :rolleyes:


Now as for the issue of FPTP, it is unfair. In theory a small party could get 10% or even 20% of the vote and not recieve any representation in parliament.
Surely you can realise that AV is even more unfair? As I've said, FPTP gives one person one vote (as should happen in a true democracy) - why should some people be given several chances under the AV system? :rolleyes:

[Sarah]

You're not having a say at all, so how can anyone know that you're displeased..? You're just blending in with the rest of the people who can't be bothered to leave their house on election day. People fought for a democracy; feel guilty ;)

Oh, and why could you only vote Lab / Lib / Con? UKIP stand in your local area, do they not?
:

Im presuming its because where he lives they have too big of a majority to compete with, so he may aswell not vote as they wouldnt win in that area.

I like AV but I know for a fact it wouldn't win. I like the system we use to vote for our Welsh Assembly AM's though. :)