Yes or no

[altariel]

OK, f'listers, let rip. In 100 words or less, and without reference to the other case, tell me why I should vote either 'yes' or 'no' to the following question:

"Do you want the United Kingdom to adopt the 'alternative vote' system instead of the current 'first past the post' system for electing Members of Parliament to the House of Commons?"

Non-UK perspectives welcome.

Comments

[temeres.livejournal.com]

Yes, because although it'll make little difference in itself, it opens up the prospect of greater reform by slow degrees and the consequent re-enfranchisement of all those whose votes are effectively wasted in non-marginal constituencies. Like me.

[altariel.livejournal.com]

I honestly can't see how that works. Won't this put voting reform off the agenda for another generation, whatever the outcome? (With a 'no' win, the attitude will be: "Well, we offered reform, but people didn't want it"; with a 'yes' win, the attitude will be: "We've had reform, why do we need more?")

[temeres.livejournal.com]

My fear is that a 'no' win will totally kill off any prospect for future reform. A 'yes' win could at least put a foot in the door. And yes, it might take another generation before things progress further towards the kind of proper PR I would prefer to see, but at least it would be a start.