AV referendum ...which way are u voting? - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

AV referendum ...which way are u voting?

magicbeans Avatar
5y, 8m agoPosted 5 years, 8 months ago
My local councillor sends email updates.... hes lovely and i did vote for him...Conservative candidate.... just got this one from him

***AV Referendum: It has not been particularly well advertised but on 5th May every voter will be provided with a light grey ballot paper as well asking if they are in favour of the alternative vote system for parliamentary elections. It is both the local and national policy of the Conservative Party to oppose this and we will be saying “No” to “AV”. We think that the existing system is simpler and produces more stable Government.***

Now, when i drive to my in laws in the east end i do see loads of say no to Alternative Voting billboards...basically its gonna cost so much money we just dont have....

so based on those billboards solely i am swinging that way....but im sure that the good people of HUKD can put forward logical and sound reasons to vote one way or the other!
magicbeans Avatar
5y, 8m agoPosted 5 years, 8 months ago
Options

All Comments

(57) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
YES to AV
#2
Yes all the way. It will make everything a lot fairer, gives the people more power with their vote.

The Conservatives are only behind saying No because they think it will affect them the most. Stupid really, it is a better system, not the best, but a step closer to what we all want; an opinion that actually matters for something.
1 Like #3
but by the looks of it...we are mentally in debt and will need to spend millions upon millions....surely this money would be better spent on armed forces/NHS.
[helper]#4
Ignore the money argument - its funny how they can always find more money for weapons or for other stuff they want to do.............

Personally - I don't know which way to vote. On the one hand AV may lead to more people voting - on the other will it provide more stable government? TBH I'm not sure its going to make one difference over another..............

Voting against AV would annoy Nick Clegg though :)

If someone does have some good reasons for or against - I'd be interested to hear them...

Edited By: gari189 on Apr 01, 2011 21:14
#5
Subscribed. I've been waiting for someone to post this... am struck with indecision myself.
#6
The cost thing is a lie. Don't let that be the deciding factor. Australia has AV and it is counted by hand so why would we be different and it is currently counted by hand so why would it change. There is a lot of rubbish been printed from both sides. £250m for machines to count votes as if.
#7
well thats some really intresting stuff....very true...they do seem to find the fund when they need to and tbh we are so badly in debt will it make a difference?!

hmmm i do hope to get some more viewpoints...im really stumped!!
3 Likes #8
Because at the moment you can only choose one party to vote for. If you are (like me) in a place where one party always wins and has done for decades, your vote is meaningless.

People here tend to vote for Labour just to keep out the Conservatives etc, but in actual fact would prefer to vote Green/LibDems but cannot because their vote will then be wasted. Unless everyone, who is like them, did the same thing, which they won't, through fear of Tory lol

However under AV they can for example, if there is 5 parties, merely dash Conservatives down as 5 and then put 1-4 wherever, Labour in 3rd for example. That way, giving another party a fair crack of the whip and also leaving the person who voted feeling they have actually had an opinion. Whereas in the past they have just been sheep herded into voting for whoever is the biggest opposition to the party they hate the most lol.


Edited By: PhearFactor on Apr 01, 2011 21:24
#9
CONservertive, It's in their name for heaven's sake, I'm 100% behind AV voting because at the moment my vote is pointless.

Edited By: shauneco on Apr 01, 2011 21:33
[helper] 1 Like #10
There was a short summary about AV in the Independent - some info below....

Process: How would the alternative vote work in practice?

* The main difference between the voting system known as the alternative vote (AV) and the one we now use, known as first past the post, is that instead of putting a cross against one candidate only, under AV you can vote for as many as you like, but have to number them in order of preference.

* Once the polls have closed, the first thing the Returning Officer's staff will do is count the first preference votes. If one candidate has secured more than 50 per cent, counting ends there, and that candidate is declared the winner.

* But in many seats, there will be no outright winner. In that case, the candidate who came last is eliminated, and his or her second preference votes are re-allocated. If that does not produce an outright winner, another candidate is eliminated, and so on until someone has over 50 per cent of the vote.

* Though you are entitled to vote for more than one candidate under AV, you do not have to. If the candidate you support is likely to win or come second, there may actually be no point in voting for anyone else, because your second preference vote is unlikely to be counted. Opponents of AV object that is unfair, because the effect is that some people have more votes than others.

* AV is sometimes wrongly described as a form of proportional representation (PR). It is not. It does not guarantee that the number of MPs elected from any party will be proportionate to the number of votes cast for that party. Indeed, it has been calculated that if AV had applied while Tony Blair was leading the Labour Party he would have won three elections with even bigger majorities. The same applied to Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. What AV would do is eliminate the phenomenon that commonly occurs under the present voting system under which an MP is elected with the support of less than half the electorate.

* Though AV does not wipe out the possibility of one party winning an outright majority, as PR would, many seats that are now so safe that the parties can afford to ignore them will become electoral battle grounds, and hung parliaments and coalition governments more likely.

* Though no one knows what the effect would be, it is reasonable to assume that there would be more Liberal Democrat MPs under AV, and fewer Conservatives, which is why the two parties are split over this. The effect on Labour's showing is harder to gauge. The smaller parties could expect to get more votes, but that might not result in their getting any more MPs.
2 Likes #11
When people start referring to Labour as the lesser of two evils and vote for them based on that. Surely that is enough to know the current voting system is a serious epic fail. Why the Conservatives are spamming so much "VOTE NO" about is beyond me, I just hope the country has enough common sense to see exactly what they are doing.

The fact that AV might not get through based on the amount of money they have spent on advertising makes me want to vomit.
1 Like #12
Yes to AV

Camerons two biggest arguments against it are that people may inadvertently vote for a worthless candidate and its so complicated people won't understand it.

1. If you don’t want to mark every candidate you don’t have to.

2. If you aren’t intelligent enough to understand such a simple concept as the alternative vote you shouldn’t have the right to vote in the first place.
#13
Always voted for tory......but the above arguments make me sway towards voting yes on the AV system.....seems fairer!!
1 Like #14
Just because this seems a little one sided, I decided to take a quick look on the say no to Av website and think this is a good point:

AV leads to more hung parliaments, backroom deals and broken promises like the Lib Dem tuition fees U-turn. Instead of the voters choosing the government, politicians would hold power.



This current hung parliament isn't fantastic, and more of them would be a problem in my opinion, I would much rather my least favourite party be in power than have a hung parliament……

I will do some more reading/research nearer to the time to decided which was I am voting though
#15
Yes to AV
4 Likes #16
yep I'm all for av forums !
1 Like #17
Is the AV voting form going to ask for your first choice AND second choice? X)
[Moderator]#18
im voting yes too ;)
1 Like #19
No to AV

AV is how the Nazi's came to power in the Weimar republic government. They capitalised on the economic slow down and the "diktat" of the treaty of Versailles to get support.

A coalition government is not as bad as everyone makes out. The current coalition okay, has had a few hiccups however has been doing quite well in parliament. FPTP creates a defined and obvious leader, with little complexity in voting.

AV I feel is quite confusing for people not into politics, therefore may well discourage previous FPTP voters who are confused by the new AV system. Ok you can educate people about how to vote with AV, you can educate people on everything however some people will just not get it or be bothered to find the time to understand the new system.

Oh and I'm a labour party member by the way

Edited By: willdev on Apr 01, 2011 23:30
2 Likes #20
No to av

Simple if it ain't broke don't fix it

Would lead to hung parliaments much more than at present leading to deals behind closed doors

Fptp has served us well and continues to do so providing effective government
#21
Marty1981
No to av

Simple if it ain't broke don't fix it

Would lead to hung parliaments much more than at present leading to deals behind closed doors

Fptp has served us well and continues to do so providing effective government


Effective government are you having a laugh? What country are you from I thought this was a UK forum.
banned#22
AV vote?

I say Panasonic for TVs
Onkyo for audio
Sony for consoles
XBMC for media
...
banned 1 Like #23
Ah ****, RichP beat me to the gag.
#24
danmc
Marty1981
No to av

Simple if it ain't broke don't fix it

Would lead to hung parliaments much more than at present leading to deals behind closed doors

Fptp has served us well and continues to do so providing effective government




Effective government are you having a laugh? What country are you from I thought this was a UK forum.

Yes its effective, could be better but still effective

Centuries of stability with mainly 1 ruling party offering a manifesto of action and they then try carry it out you don't like them you vote someone else in.
banned 1 Like #25
Yes vote.
I'm for anything the tories don't want.
1 Like #26
No, I don't want to see the muslims or the edl or the more extreme groups having a bigger platform to spurt their rubbish nor do I want loonies in the house. This is not the way of the future imo BUT I would like to see the LibDem's getting a bigger voice in politics, not because I support them but they deserve it.
The potential is there for a platform being formed by the lefties and righties - NO THANKS
#27
Could someone please explain how this would give more of a chance to 'extreme' political parties? I read this is an argument Cameron is using, but just wondering if there's much truth behind it or if it's just scaremongering?
banned#28
yes all the way.

My vote has been meaningless every time as Conservatives hold a massive majority here
banned#29
oldmanhouse
Could someone please explain how this would give more of a chance to 'extreme' political parties? I read this is an argument Cameron is using, but just wondering if there's much truth behind it or if it's just scaremongering?

exaggeration rather than scaremongering imo. In fact, the reverse could be true.

say 35% of voters vote BNP so they get a seat as it stands. The other 65% are likely to not vote BNP at all as an alternative vote so increasing the chances of a Lab / con victory.
#30
csiman
oldmanhouse
Could someone please explain how this would give more of a chance to 'extreme' political parties? I read this is an argument Cameron is using, but just wondering if there's much truth behind it or if it's just scaremongering?

exaggeration rather than scaremongering imo. In fact, the reverse could be true.

say 35% of voters vote BNP so they get a seat as it stands. The other 65% are likely to not vote BNP at all as an alternative vote so increasing the chances of a Lab / con victory.


I take your point but isn't it the same system for european voters and look what's happening there.
I'm also thinking on a longer term basis.
banned#31
Joey Bloggsy
csiman
oldmanhouse
Could someone please explain how this would give more of a chance to 'extreme' political parties? I read this is an argument Cameron is using, but just wondering if there's much truth behind it or if it's just scaremongering?

exaggeration rather than scaremongering imo. In fact, the reverse could be true.

say 35% of voters vote BNP so they get a seat as it stands. The other 65% are likely to not vote BNP at all as an alternative vote so increasing the chances of a Lab / con victory.


I take your point but isn't it the same system for european voters and look what's happening there.
I'm also thinking on a longer term basis.

I thought most in Europe use Proportional Representation which isnt the same thing, or is it?......:|
#32
Yes to AV here!
#33
csiman
Joey Bloggsy
csiman
oldmanhouse
Could someone please explain how this would give more of a chance to 'extreme' political parties? I read this is an argument Cameron is using, but just wondering if there's much truth behind it or if it's just scaremongering?

exaggeration rather than scaremongering imo. In fact, the reverse could be true.

say 35% of voters vote BNP so they get a seat as it stands. The other 65% are likely to not vote BNP at all as an alternative vote so increasing the chances of a Lab / con victory.


I take your point but isn't it the same system for european voters and look what's happening there.
I'm also thinking on a longer term basis.

I thought most in Europe use Proportional Representation which isnt the same thing, or is it?......:|


Yes there is a difference but what I'm saying is the potential is there for extremism, Australia is more akin to this method.
You put your main party down and second choice etc
Taken from google -
If no candidate gains a majority on first preferences, then the second-preference votes of the candidate who finished last on the first count are redistributed. This process is repeated until someone gets over 50 per cent.

Also - parties seen as more extreme by others (such as Sinn Féin in Ireland) find it harder to attract second preferences, and therefore find it harder to win seats.

When Labour used it -
"The Labour leadership election showed that AV doesn’t work. David Miliband won the support of most Labour MPs and Party Members, and was ahead in the first three rounds of voting – and yet Ed Miliband became the shock new Labour leader after sneaking the fourth round by just 1%.

I have copied and pasted just to give some points of view for ppl to read without googling it themselves.

I should add that I stand to be corrected if the right reasons are given.


Edited By: Joey Bloggsy on Apr 02, 2011 14:04: .
#34
glad to get some alternative view points as well....

do agree with the if it aint broke thing, am swaying to the no again!BNP quite strong down in Dagenham ways ..and my in laws live there.... not good
1 Like #35
Yes to AV

Let's give some of the smaller parties a chance
[mod]#36
I'll be voting no.
#37
I will be voting yes and there is a simple reason for it
for so long now we have been ruled by either labour, conservatives or lib dims and look at the mess we are in right now, if our voting system stays the way it is there will never really be any chance for an outside party to have a go and who knows they may just do some good, if there is even the slightest inkling that this AV system will give even a marginal chance for those outsider parties then i'm all for that.
1 Like #38
Redfang55
I will be voting yes and there is a simple reason for it
for so long now we have been ruled by either labour, conservatives or lib dims and look at the mess we are in right now, if our voting system stays the way it is there will never really be any chance for an outside party to have a go and who knows they may just do some good, if there is even the slightest inkling that this AV system will give even a marginal chance for those outsider parties then i'm all for that.


The Lib Dems have never been in power (other than the farce 'condem' coalition over the past year) since there formation in 1988. The Liberal Party before them were last in power under David Lloyd George in 1922 (1916-22 wartime coalition government).

So really we have hardly been ruled by the Lib Dems or Liberals. It has been a monopoly shared by the Conservatives and Labour parties.

I highly doubt AV will increase the overall chances of 'outside' parties gaining power. True, one or two extra seats may be gained here or there but in reality the second wave of vote counts/distribution will wipe them out.

If anything AV will increase the chances of the Lib Dems actually achieving some solo power of there own, however, with there unexpected coalition with the Conservative Party and disregard of their pre-coalition government ideology then they have lost the confidence and support of a lot of supporters.

Labour are backing AV as the Conservatives are heavily campaigning against it.
banned 1 Like #39
Redfang55
I will be voting yes and there is a simple reason for it
for so long now we have been ruled by either labour, conservatives or lib dims and look at the mess we are in right now, if our voting system stays the way it is there will never really be any chance for an outside party to have a go and who knows they may just do some good, if there is even the slightest inkling that this AV system will give even a marginal chance for those outsider parties then i'm all for that.


Who are these 'other parties' that need to have a chance?

The Greens? A one-issue party.

UKIP? A joke.

BNP? Do we really need to give racists a bigger platform than the comments section of the Daily Mail?
#40
willdev
No to AV

AV is how the Nazi's came to power in the Weimar republic government. They capitalised on the economic slow down and the "diktat" of the treaty of Versailles to get support.

A coalition government is not as bad as everyone makes out. The current coalition okay, has had a few hiccups however has been doing quite well in parliament. FPTP creates a defined and obvious leader, with little complexity in voting.

AV I feel is quite confusing for people not into politics, therefore may well discourage previous FPTP voters who are confused by the new AV system. Ok you can educate people about how to vote with AV, you can educate people on everything however some people will just not get it or be bothered to find the time to understand the new system.

Oh and I'm a labour party member by the way

Thats ridiculous. It is easy for people to rank things in terms of preference.
Only difference here is that it relates to political parties instead of other things that people may choose to rank.

Example
Whats you favourite takeaway
Chinese
KFC
Indian
Maccie D's
Kebabs
No Take Aways - just home cooking.
Pizza

I am sure that people would have no difficulty ranking these options. The idea of AV voting is exactly the same. If no outright favourite is selected with the first votes, then second place votes are taken into account.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!