Roger Mills wrote:
On 03/05/2011 15:11, John Williamson wrote:
Roger Mills wrote:
On 03/05/2011 11:23, John Williamson wrote:


I don't see the need to change, myself. The FPTP system has generally
been delivering stable government here for a while now.


My general philosophy is "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"

But it IS broke! It might deliver 'stable' government but, in a
multi-party environment, it delivers MPs *and* governments for which
most of the people have NOT voted. That's why we need a change.

As far as I can see, all AV will do will replace the "More people voted
for me than anyone else" with "Less people really hate me than anyone
else"


But isn't that preferable?

In most places, as far as I can tell, the result would be the same. In
marginal constituencies, the result might be the same or it might not.

In either case, the overall result is determined by the marginal
constituencies, so why change things? Australia uses AV, but everyone
*must* vote, and voters *must* rank all candidates or their vote is
wasted. Nobody uses the exact system proposed in the UK, which would
immediately make me suspicious of its benefits. If it's so good, why
does nobody use it?

See the whole thing illustrated rather cleverly in Dan Snow's video, to
be screened on TV this evening - and available he
http://www.yestofairervotes.org/page...03DanSnowEmail

Doesn't match my experience of such things. Beer or coffee? Okay, which
pub/ coffeshop? But that's not really relevant to Parliament.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.