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

[sallymn.livejournal.com]

I don't really understand what AV is - we have preferences, which is a headache but one I'm willing to have for the better representation we get - but as I understand it, this might be a first step in changing FPTP.

But then, I'm one of those strange folk who approve of compulsory voting, so....

[altariel.livejournal.com]

From my understanding, AV is a system which is like FPTP in delivering a single winner and keeping the link with constituencies, but asks voters to rank candidates rather than pick a single preference. Second and third preferences are shared out until one candidate gets more than 50% of the vote.

So it's not that much of a change from FPTP, but I haven't quite sorted out to my satisfaction whether the horse-trading that will result will be positive or not, and whether I really want to lose FPTP's capacity to thoroughly spank a party and chuck it out of government. I think that's an unsung feature of FPTP.

[sallymn.livejournal.com]

capacity to thoroughly spank a party and chuck it out of government.. Oh, I think our recent elections in NSW showed you can do that quite spectacularly under preferences... though the concensus isn't so much spank as spindle, fold, mutilate and then cut off at the knees. And that's the polite version.

[altariel.livejournal.com]

Yes, I've found some data-crunching that suggests AV can also deliver big majorities. Hmm. Will think more.