|
| Welcome to NoE Version 2. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. << Furthermore, adverts like these are removed as you sign up! Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Referendum: Electoral Reform; AV; Yes or No | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jul 14 2010, 07:34 PM (346 Views) | |
| picollo no. | Jul 14 2010, 07:34 PM Post #1 |
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
Well it was announced sometime ago there will be a referendum held on 5th May 2011 for electoral reform for elections to Westminster with the possibility of the current First-Past-Post-System being replaced by Alternative Vote electoral system. Both systems are rather simple to work and I'll give a handy link which describes how each system works and its pros and cons: first-past-the-post alternative vote This won't apply to all of us here but a few of us will be old enough to vote in this referendum and those who won't be can still take part in this poll ;) So the question is would you vote yes or no for electoral reform. Personally I don't think very highly of either system as none offer proportional representation but if I don't vote yes now it could be decades before we get another chance to reform the electoral system (partiuclarly if Tories get in next general election) or even have another referendum. If it results in a 'yes' for AV it could be a stepping stone for greater change but it comes at the risk of a potentially even more disproportionate system. So at the moment I'm inclined to vote 'yes' but my intuition tells me the result will probably be a 'no' so we'll stick with F-P-T-P. |
 |
 
|
| Cieran | Jul 15 2010, 12:48 PM Post #2 |
Celebrate with cake!
|
Resounding Yes. If I could be bothered I'd campaign for yes. This is an issue I feel strongly about. AV isn't very good, but it's damn better than FPTP... |
|
|
|
| sqeak | Jul 15 2010, 01:06 PM Post #3 |
 
|
does this mean I should register to vote soon? |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | Jul 15 2010, 04:26 PM Post #4 |
|
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
Yes Sqeak, yes it does ;) I agree Cieran that we really do need a change to the system but I'm not sure I'd say AV was particularly better than f-p-t-p. Sure it kinda guarentees that a candidate recieves at least 50% of the vote before winning a seat but it doesn't really makes things more proportional. |
|
|
|
| Cieran | Jul 16 2010, 10:07 AM Post #5 |
|
Celebrate with cake!
|
As Nick Clegg said, it's a baby step in the right direction. For example, had this election been under AV instead of FPTP the Lib Dems would have received something like 85 seats or so, which is a bit more proportional... |
|
|
|
| DMHowe | Jul 17 2010, 09:44 PM Post #6 |
|
Do not try and eat the cake, only try and realise the truth.
|
I'm evil. No. *exits to the imperial march* |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | Jul 18 2010, 08:09 PM Post #7 |
|
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
Howe being contary :) time for discussion and reasonable debate (not something you should find on an internet forum :p ) Why would you vote no Howe if you don't mind me asking? |
|
|
|
| DMHowe | Jul 18 2010, 11:20 PM Post #8 |
|
Do not try and eat the cake, only try and realise the truth.
|
I don't actually have anything against AV. If we got into pure PR then I get a little angsty because of influence from John Stuart Mill about the tyranny of the masses. FPTP is horrendously unfair - none of us can deny that. But equally if put to a referrendum, capital punishment would come back. True, people will say that if people are questioned then that 60% for lowers to 32%, but if put to referrendum, enough people will talk about rapists and pedophiles for that 60% to be strong. Basically, what I'm saying is that whilst I know it's slightly horrible to say, sometimes a barrier against democracy is not a bad thing. If we select leaders on the basis they can make decisions on the basis we feel they are better mentally placed to make them, then surely it stands to reason that the more we suggest we "know it ourselves", we're contradicting that point of elected representation? In terms of why I'd vote no... I'd vote no just because I don't want to move to PR, and that's what this is. The trickle. My problem though, is the double-pronged attack. I'd be fine with PR if we had a house of lords I could trust. But unfortunately, because we're changing that too then I can't trust the people of Britain to make a decision most beneficial to the majority. What the majority wants is not what they need, you only need to look at the outcry over Obama's reforms to see this. Sometimes, it is better to say "you'll thank me later". I'm not saying that the lords should be heredetary by the way, just that they shouldn't be elected. Having it made up of judges, perhaps the clergy if we believe that they should have a voice, heads of trade unions and such alike would possibly be better than an election. The point I'm getting at is there are alternatives to voting, and we seem to live in a society that forgets that. Obsessed with voting as we are, it all becomes a shambolic game similar to x-factor. |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | Jul 19 2010, 08:10 AM Post #9 |
|
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
Hmm fair points there Howe and I would honestly agree with some of them particularly about the Lords. The Lords is a revising chamber not a legislative one so I don't see why it needs to be elected. And I agree we shouldn't have a referendum on everything as you say we have a representative democracy not a direct one, however as it is our electoral system isn't very representative and AV isn' much better. So I'd say a referendum for PR will be needed sometime and as long as the electorate are educated about it there shouldn't be too many problems. However the Governmemt will probably choose what it wants to educate the electorate about so if they don't want PR they won't tell the voters anything about PR :| |
|
|
|
| DMHowe | Jul 19 2010, 10:48 AM Post #10 |
|
Do not try and eat the cake, only try and realise the truth.
|
As I've said, I don't think fptp is representative and that requires change. In terms of education, the tories are claiming a desire to remove government-mandates about what is taught in an effort to reduce beurocracy. Be great if that'd been two years ago, I'd not have had to do green science bullshit. I digress. I don't have a problem with reform itself, I just believe pragmatism is important, and that democracy is all well and good, but is not always trustworthy. Let's not forget, as I often say, a lynch mob represents the will of the people. |
|
|
|
| Tiptup | May 2 2011, 02:23 PM Post #11 |
Funk.
|
Just gonna bump this for the run-up to Thursday. I'm unsure at the moment, leaning towards Yes. I've been doing research and the No campaign seems to be awful in itself, so I was hoping to read from people against AV, to give their real, non-subversive opinions, like DMHowe's points above, rather than the weird 'you're too stupid to understand' or 'only 3 countries use it' or 'you'll kill a baby' non-arguments we get from the No campaign politicians ?:/ |
|
|
|
| Takoa | May 2 2011, 04:17 PM Post #12 |
Merry
|
I've already voted no via postal vote. AV simply doesn't seem mathematically fair to me. If they weighted the 2nd and 3rd choice votes to count as proportionally less than a whole vote then I might not mind as much. |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | May 2 2011, 05:01 PM Post #13 |
|
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
I was thinking of not voting but then I was immediately emotionally blackmailed about what had been sacrificed to give me my right to vote so I suppose to quote South Park it's 'vote or die'. Anyway I'm most likely to vote yes. Not because I like AV but the current system needs change as it is inherently unfair and this may be the only chance we get for decades. |
|
|
|
| Tiptup | May 2 2011, 05:16 PM Post #14 |
|
Funk.
|
Yeah it works to create a compromise, but I think a compromised +50% support is still a better democratic representation than an uncompromised 35% support having total control? |
|
|
|
| Cieran | May 4 2011, 03:31 PM Post #15 |
|
Celebrate with cake!
|
Take your maths and piss off. Go. You make me sick. ILY really though ;) ... |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | May 4 2011, 04:58 PM Post #16 |
|
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
Well big day tomorrow, hopefully I'll stop getting emails from the yes campaign =/ |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| « Previous Topic · News + Opinions · Next Topic » |