UK AV Referendum Poll

[YL]

-If AV passes that possibly means that (meaningfull) Electoral Reform will be off the agenda for a generation.

See, I think it's more that if AV loses it'll take any electoral reform off the agenda for a generation.  Which is why I'm intending to vote yes, although I'd prefer STV and I don't support the Coalition.

[YL]

I really don't understand the arguments of PR supporters against AV. FPP is the worst possible system in the world (excluding multi-seat winner-takes-all, but this would be just crazy) and whatever would replace it would be better.

I think some of it (not all) is people looking for an excuse to vote No for Clegg-bashing reasons.  (Personally, I'll do my Clegg-bashing in the local elections on the same day.)

I also think this idea that if AV is rejected we'll get STV or some other more proportional system on the table is nonsense; the anti-reform people will take the result as an endorsement of FPTP, and the turnout as evidence that people aren't really that interested anyway, and there'll be no chance of reform for 20 years or more.

[YL]

On the subject of stupid arguments, the most deranged of all hasn't been raised yet; the idea that AV will be a magic bullet to cure all that is wrong with the political system in this country.

Maybe because it's such a crazy idea that no-one really believes it?

[YL]

Absolutely. But Labour shouldn't have a tiny amount of seats on that percentage, which is what AV could ensure.

We can't know for sure, but I really doubt AV would make that much difference.  Transfers won't be that predictable, and a lot of people (and I'd think this would include a lot of people who vote for the likes of the BNP) won't transfer to either Labour or the Tories.

Note that a poll last July actually showed slightly more second preferences from "Others" going to Labour than the Tories, and the Tories only slightly ahead on second preferences from the Lib Dems.  (Source: http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/PVSCBill_analysis2.html )

[YL]

It seems to me that you're all essentially arguing either in favour of the Australian senate model or the Australian House of Reps model. I spot a solution.

Not a bad idea, as long as we can discard compulsory full preferencing and above the line voting.

[YL]

A very high percentage of people (perhaps a majority? Certainly a large minority) will only use one preference anyway. I'm reasonably sure that AV would have less of an impact than its advocates and detractors presume.

I'm inclined to agree - as well as people only using one preference, I don't believe voters will be as predictable in their lower preferences as some people seem to think.  Remember that in Northern Ireland Euro elections there are cases of people voting for Ian Paisley and then transferring to Sinn Féin.

I noticed that Jonathan Harston has a guess at how the Sheffield seats would have voted under AV on his website:
http://mdfs.net/Docs/Sheffield/Election/2010/VotesGE
I think the conclusion is right (Central flips to LD but the others are unchanged) but the details of the transfers look over-simplified to me (e.g. nearly all UKIP votes seem to go to the Tories, BNP votes don't transfer at all).

Of some relevance:
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3424

[YL]

Antony Green has been blogging quite a bit lately about the referendum. He seems to be quite perturbed by claims from some of the No advocates.

Seems like a fairly impressive demolition of most of the "No" campaign's arguments.

Well, except the "I hate Nick Clegg and want to give him a bloody nose" type...

[YL]

Just seen an article about Huhne telling the NO camp to stop telling lies. I thought it was YES who was telling voters that AV means all MPs will have 50%+ and get rid of safe seats... seems a bit questionable as well, to be fair.

Having now seen both campaign leaflets, I think the Yes leaflet, like many political leaflets, is misleading but avoids out-and-out lies.  The No leaflet, on the other hand, contains lies: there is no other word for saying that adopting AV would require us to spend £130 million on electronic vote counting machines.  Also, the claim in the leaflet that Australia wants to get rid of AV seems to have been demolished by Antony Green.

The No leaflet also says, and this is a verbatim quote, "The only vote that would count under AV would be Nick Clegg's".

[YL]

Interesting article at
http://gowers.wordpress.com/2011/04/20/is-av-better-than-fptp/

[YL]

Voted Yes (and Green in the locals; would have voted Labour in those if it had been about the national parties, but it isn't).  I don't expect either vote to be on the winning side.