There’s now a local group in Rayleigh for the “Yes” campaign in the referendum on the Alternative Vote system. It’s open to supporters from all political parties (or supporters of no party).
The group will hold its first meeting in the Hungry Horse (The Travellers Joy) in Down Hall Road, Rayleigh, SS6 9JF at 7.30 pm on 6 April.
Those interested in the campaign to change our voting system will be welcome to come along and hear how they can help secure a Yes vote in the referendum on 5 May.
Some people will say that the best political discussions always take place in a pub….
Is it true this was voted for and only decide after The Crown was dropped after the first count and its votes redistributed and then ……
Not yet convinced of the merits of AV. Can some one put the case for change.
Under the current system
MPs can win seats with only 1 in 3 voters voting for them;
MPs can have safe seats for life even though the majority of their constituents haven’t voted for them;
MPs don’t have to reach out to secure over 50% of the vote in their constituencies.
AV is a small step to make MP’s work harder for their seats, having to reach out beyond their normal core vote. This is the basic argument that you will hear repeated again and again (hopefully) but it doesn’t make it any less valid. It isn’t PR, which I would prefer, but at least it is a small step in the right direction.
Something that may decide you to vote for it is that the BNP do not want AV and have told their members to vote no.
This is probably because BNP and others support full PR so they can have their small percentage of seats. This being the weakness of full PR. Overall though people should vote for the party that best reflects their views and not vote negatively. i.e tactical voting. The biggest battle is to encourage voters to actually vote at all.
Bruce – you can read all about it here:
http://www.rayleighlibdems.org.uk/articles/1103av.html
AV isn’t the best thing since sliced bread – but the choice is between that and what we’ve got!!
If Sid’s picture were to be expanded would he have a red cloak and a sack of presents ? ( sorry – maybe it’s just me )
You’re not far wrong……
If I go to the pub and order a pint of Carling and they’re out of Carling so I order a pint of John Smith’s, but they’re also out of John Smith’s, would I order a pint of Griffin? Never!
Still trying to get to grips with the arguments for and against and as yet undecided,
Alison
Alison, I don’t even know what Griffin is, so I’m in difficulty already 🙂
But when you are buying a drink for yourself, that’s precisely what you are doing – buying for yourself. But when you vote for an MP, you are choosing one for everyone.
If 40% of drinkers want creme-de-menthe, 35% want Boddingtons and 25% want Ruddles, under first-past-the-post everyone gets creme-de-menthe. Under AV everyone will probably get Boddingtons. More people are happy or happy-ish.
Or maybe there’s a bar-room brawl.
Hi Chris – sorry – don’t agree with your post on this one. I vote for the MP / Party who most represent what I feel should be done. I certainly don’t take into account anybody else, they can vote for themselves. I have missed the point ?
A Griffin is a particularly bitter brew, also known as ‘Nasty Nick’, from the British National Paralogism brewery, and is concerned with the repatriation of beers not deemed to be the ‘right colour’. If 40% of people wanted creme de menthe and 35% wanted Griffin so we got Griffin, well I dread to think…
Thanks for your comments, Chris. Lots to think about! Still undecided!
Rayleigh Resident – Of course, people want to vote for the MP or party who most represenst what they feel should be done.
But suppose you want to vote Conservative and live in Rochdale. At the last election Labour got 36%, the Lib Dems got 34% and the Conservatives got 18%. Your vote is not likely to affect the outcome. Even if you went out campaigning on the doorstep and persuaded 100 more people to vote Conservative, it’s not going to affect things.
On the other hand suppose you live in Rochford and Southend East. At the last election, the Conservatives got 46%, Labour got 20% and the Lib Dems got 19%. It’s a safe Tory seat, your vote is still going to have little impact. There are lot of MPs in safe seats who work conscientiously and build up a personal following from people who are naturally inclined towards another party. But there are also MPs in safe seats who don’t bother with all that because they can always win on the support of their diehard supporters.
Suppose we had the AV vote system. There were actually 7 candidates in Rochdale last time- no candidate would win on initial votes, because none got close to 50% of the vote:
Labour 36.4 %
Liberal Democrat 34.4 %
Conservative 18.1 %
National Front 4.9 %
UKIP 4.4 %
Islam Zinda Baad 1.2 %
Independent 0.7 %
Under AV, the candidates with the least votes would gradually be eliminated and their second and third preferences would be distributed amongst the other parties. So after the first four rounds of counting the figures would look something like this
Labour 40.9 %
Liberal Democrat 35.7 %
Conservative 23.8 %
At this stage the Conservative candidate would be eliminated. At this stage the alterntive preferences of the Conservative voters would be taken into account. I’d guess that most of them would prefer the Lib Dem to Labour, so the Lib Dems would have won the seat (unlike what happened in real life, where Labour won with just 36 %
And what about Rochford and Southend East under AV ? It’s got a big Tory majority.
But suppose Mr Duddridge stood down. If his replacement as Tory Candidate has a bad attitude and relied on his core Tory vote , he might be in trouble, because he wouldn’t win on a first round of counting with 46% and people from other parties would be unlikely to have him as a second preference. He might just possibly lose. On the other hand, if he had worked hard and got a good reputation, he would be likely to get second preferences from other parties’ supporters and he would win – maybe even in a bad year for the Tories nationally.
Regarding the BNP – AV is not going to help them. Their best chance of winning a seat is under the current system.
Look at a constituency Like Burnley , which was one of the better results for the BNP last May. The Lib Dems got 35%, Labour got 31%, Conservatives got 17% and the BNP got 9%. Under the present system, if the BNP could manage to TREBLE their vote, they might possibly win , on something like BNP 27%, Lib Dems 26% Labour 26%, Conservatives 13%.
Under AV, the BNP might get an initial boost, telling people their vote wasn’t wasted any more. But the winning post is now longer as close as 27%. It’s 50 %. And I can’t see them ever getting to that 50 percent figure. They wouldn’t win.
Perhaps people could move. All those that vote Labour in Rochford can move to Rochdale and visa versa. What if Alison wants Carling and only Carling. This is what I would do. I want this and am not willing to put my name to what I consider second best.
Knowing Angelina, I really don’t think that she would like living in Rochdale, Bruce; it rains a lot you know. Why do you think I moved down south?
Alison
ps Theakston’s Old Peculiar every time.
Dear Alison
I heard that you moved after a family vote. Children put Wales first, husband/ partner Scotland …….complete as appropriate.
If, under AV, I decide that I do not want my vote to go anybody else other than one candidate ( and only mark one cross ) is my ballot paper deemed to be spoilt and therefore not counted ? Chris – any ideas ?
Oh, your ballot paper is accepted and counted.
If AV comes in and people don’t agree with it ( or could not be bothered to vote in the referendum )then they can simply put down one vote as now – so you can have a certain percentage voting “AV” and the rest ignoring it. This is just an exercise by the Conservatives to keep Cleggy & Co on their side.