To call it a fairer way of electing MPs is ludicrous. The reality of a two party system may now have changed into a 3 party system with minority parties thriving in some areas, but AV isn't the answer. As there seems to be no call for Proportional Representation, an abandonment of constituency politics and the chaos of coalition after coalition, the 'middle ground' option as AV can be described seems the only possibility for change, but any change in this direction is a change for the worse. The benefits of First Past the Post and 'one person: one vote' politics remain despite our hung parliament in 2010. Only if this system continues to throw up this sort of problem should a different system be discussed.
If you go into an election with a party that you support in mind, and a party you have strong opinions towards, you are going to vote for them. I heard the YES campaigners during this referendum talking about AV stopping tactical voting, but this doesn't particularly stand up. Surely votes 2, 3 and 4 will be tactical as you list options that seem to be lesser evils rather than strong candidates, and will allow the voter plenty of chances to keep a certain party out. I find it astounding that this system could result in 49% of a constituency's votes being counted once, and some being counted upwards of 2 or 3 times simply because they originally voted for unpopular candidates. This is an extreme example, but by no means an impossible one, and it would be far from fair.
Both sides during the campaign tried to scare votes by mentioning the threat of the rise of the BNP in the same breath as the opposite campaign. Frankly they were both talking scare mongering nonsense and should be ashamed of their tactics, but I do feel mentioning the BNP is important. What concerns me is this. If a racist bigot, to use a rather controversial term, or extreme nationalist turns up at their local polling station and puts a 1 in the box next to BNP, do we think this person has the right to having their vote counted more times than those who voted for an acceptable and recognized political party? My other huge concern is along this line too. Is it a fair political system in which somebody who votes for a minority party and in some cases a racist and hate inciting party like the BNP, can be the person who swings the majority in a tight seat. I find this very hard to justify.
- AV increases tactical voting
- Encourages people to waste their vote in the knowledge they'll get another chance
- Allows voters of minority parties t play a more important role in electing an MP than those who initially voted for the most popular candidate
- It makes a mockery of all votes being equal, a principle which our free political system should be based upon
All that and I didn't insult Nick Clegg or put the future of the coalition government at risk.
No comments:
Post a Comment