AV wouldn't make any difference in safe seats. So that rules out about half the constituencies in the country.
AV accentuates landslide elections. Labour would have fared far worse in the 1980s and could have been virtually wiped out in 1983 and 1987 elections if AV had been in place. It was a long haul back from those disastrous results even under FPTP, but we made it.
It’s hardly any consolation that a similar fate would have befallen the Tories in 1997 and 2001.
Psephologists agree that the Lib Dems would be the main beneficiary of AV enabling them to be permanent kingmakers. Consequently AV could consign the country to long-term, if not permanent right of centre coalitions – like the current appalling administration.
I don’t like the notion that candidates who initially come third can eventually win – that’s not democratic in my book.
It is for these reasons that I will be voting NO to AV on Thursday.
I urge everyone who cares about democracy, who cherishes the public services that Labour has built up since 1945 and who believe in progressive social change to join me in voting No to AV.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If the previous Labour government had truly believed in progressive social change they would not have sat on the haunches of their large majority, studiously ignoring the benefits of changing the electoral system.
ReplyDeleteA serious debate and voting system election could have ensued had Labour not reverted to their 'I am allright Jack' condition.
I am not a Liberal Party member but it is incorrect to suggest that the Liberal Party is right of centre. Were the Labour Party and the Liberal Party to have formed a coalition at the last general election, which had been a distinct possibility, and would have undoubtedly ensued had the Labour Party secured a few more seats, I think you would agree that this would have
ReplyDeleteled to a left of centre coalition.