As a politics teacher I am looking forward to the AV referendum next year (although personally I wouldn't vote to have one; too expensive at this time). I don't yet know which way I will vote, but I am currently leaning towards the "No" side and one thing in particular has been tipping my view.
I am concerned that the people advocating AV are actually those who want full blown PR, which I am definitely against - this article on the Coffee House blog says it all, that all those chosen to push AV actually don't support it but another system.
Why would I vote for a system which may lead, in time, to a system I am totally opposed to?
3 comments:
But surely everything 'might' lead to something. You can't guarantee it - as a history teacher you should be aware of that (as I am, following a slap over the proverbial wrist for using 'inevitable'). Would you rather play it safe and stick with a system that effectively disenfranchises people or try something new, knowing that it might not work, but with the hope of better democracy at the end?
Speaking as one of the effectively disenfranchised, I think I know which way I'll be voting.
True, but FPTP guarantees me (insofar as we can be guaranteed anything in life) that we won't end up with something awful like AMS or STV. If I vote for AV (which I like the idea of) then it could then lead onto those systems. Will AV make it more or less likely that we'll end up with STV?
There are people on both sides of this one: some arch supporters of STV oppose AV precisely because they think that if we get AV then electoral reform will stop there and they will never get what they really want.
I personally think that to try to vote "tactically" in the AV referendum - either because you love STV or hate it - is just nonsense. Perhaps it is FPTP that has made us think of every vote as tactical. It is a simple question: "Is AV better or worse than FPTP". Stop machinating and Vote For What You Believe In. The nice thing about AV is that, if we get it, we can all then vote-for-what-we-believe-in; every time. Wouldn't that be healthy?
Post a Comment