Scottlish Elections

[Woodstock Jag]

I appreciate WJ accusing me of being narrow minded (in a political sense), but I don't see my intentions as being any different from those that trundle to the ballot box every time there is an election and put a cross in the box for the party that they/their parents/their grandparents have always voted for and always will, without any knowledge of what the parties stand for or how their policies will affect them and their communities. In a UK election, Glasgow will always be RED until we change to full PR. Which is basically my problem with this.

 

Two wrongs, good Sir.

 

I appreciate that (according to most estimates) AV would have produced pretty much the same result in Scotland as FPTP at the last election. I appreciate that our political culture needs to change. Really. I *get* that. I prefer STV. But that's not an option here, and regardless of the result in the referendum, it's not going to be a choice for at least another 2 to 3 generations. Harsh reality is there isn't a mandate for as radical reform as you or I would like. The "miserable compromise" that has resulted isn't much of an improvement, but it IS an improvement. Most independent measures of voting power say it will increase (albeit marginally) under AV. That's not brilliant, but it's worth voting for. A No2AV vote is a vote to endorse the current system and to reject completely the case for fuller reform.

 

WJ has given the statistics (based on a recent BBC report) about the Lib Dem manifesto and how much of it was included in the coalition agreement. To my knowledge their was no intention to have a vote on AV in the Lib Dem manifesto. AV is not the preferred voting reform of anybody - it was a compromise. AV will at best make minimal difference in areas like Glasgow where Labour has a strong support. In a UK sense, my vote for Lib Dem over the years has mattered not a jot - it is only in Scotland where I have voted for them via the list system that I've felt my vote was counted.

 

Certainly it wasn't in the Lib Dem manifesto (incidentally, however, it was in the Labour one, late converts that they are). That, as far as I can see, represents clamour for "some sort of voting reform" albeit not the kind that some of us would like.

 

Even if WJs BBC statistics about the Lib Dem manifesto are correct, I cannot ignore the Tuition Fees that they have backed, this compromise on voting reform, or some of the items in the budget that they have passed. I don't know how WJ voted at the last UK election. If he voted Lib Dem, maybe he is happy. I am not. This is my first chance to express my unhappyness at a UK level - and it might actually count.

 

You don't need to ignore the tuition fees package they backed, which means the bottom quarter of graduate earners pay less

 

The bottom line is that the AV referendum isn't about the Lib Dems. Setting the train in motion for electoral reform will last long after Nick Clegg is pushing up the daisies.

 

I voted Lib Dem. I'm not ecstatic with the current situation, but I'm content with most of the decisions that have been made in the context of a party representing a mere 23% of the popular vote and under 9% of the seats in Parliament, and who have not been in government at Westminster for decades, they've fought well above their weight and achieved a lot of their policy objectives.

[MerryHell]

I personally will be supporting AV mainly because the Tories want me to vote NO as do many of my 'favourite' Neo-Labourites such as John Reid - petty it may be as I don't think it is the best option we could have had.

 

Just a polite warning that WJ may call you narrow-minded for voting for these reasons.

 

However, you do plan to vote 'YES' so you may be spared any critisism.

[Woodstock Jag]

Just a polite warning that WJ may call you narrow-minded for voting for these reasons.

 

However, you do plan to vote 'YES' so you may be spared any critisism.

 

No, I think those reasons are narrow-minded too. I'm just not going to go out of my way to dissuade people from voting for the right thing for the wrong reasons

[MerryHell]

Two wrongs, good Sir.

 

I have not tried to suggest anyone on this forum is right or wrong, just giving my personal opinion.

 

AV is not fair - it could still result in a party gaining 25% of the popular (first) vote, and only 8% of the seats.

 

I'll accept we have differing opinions, and leave it at that.

[Woodstock Jag]

I have not tried to suggest anyone on this forum is right or wrong, just giving my personal opinion.

 

AV is not fair - it could still result in a party gaining 25% of the popular (first) vote, and only 8% of the seats.

 

I'll accept we have differing opinions, and leave it at that.

 

Just to be clear, when I said "two wrongs" I'm saying that you voting on what you regard as equivalent motives to these other people doesn't mean they're right either.

 

AV definitely isn't fair, and it's not (on paper) more proportional. What you say could still be true, but if there's one thing that's damned sure is that AV is better than FPTP in that it actually creates a "post" someone need pass. All estimates I've seen suggest that smaller parties will perform as well, if not marginally better under AV with the new boundaries. It's not proportional by design, but it could be more proportional in practice.

[Jaggernaut]

I'm enthusiastic about PR - I really do believe it produces a far more representative result which takes account of minority views, crucial to any genuinely democratic system IMHO.

 

So I'm no supporter of FPTP. My real concern about the referendum/AV is that if it's adopted, we'll never get the chance to bring in a fairer system. AV just seems to be playing about at the edges.

 

I'll be voting NO in the hope that it will lead to a more balanced discussion about a fairer voting system.

I'm afraid that's cloud cuckoo land. If the NO vote wins then any discussion about a fairer system will be dead and buried for decades, which is exactly what those who the system suits perfectly (i.e. the two "big" parties) want.

 

Like many others, at first I didn't really know what AV consisted of, but that was because I didn't make the effort to look at what it consists of. It took me a couple of minutes to look at it, and it's clearly superior and fairer than FTOF, sorry, FPTP.

 

If you'll allow me to quote myself, see above, and then see that rat-face Reid has already proclaimed as much (from the BBC website):

 

Labour's Lord Reid, who backed the No campaign, said the decisive result "should put electoral reform off the agenda".

Edited May 6, 2011 by Jaggernaut

[Woodstock Jag]

it's clearly superior and fairer than FTOF, sorry, FPTP.

 

That works on so many levels

[Lambies Lost Doo]

Voting Conservative x2. Would like to see Galloway get in as it would shake the parliament up. Salmond gets his own way too often and the standard of debate at times can be very poor. I would like to highlight that a vote for the SNP is a vote for the separation of the UK. They trumpted Ireland as Scotland's role model. They trumpeted Iceland as Scotland's role model. They are both bankrupt and bust.

[Woodstock Jag]

Voting Conservative x2. Would like to see Galloway get in as it would shake the parliament up. Salmond gets his own way too often and the standard of debate at times can be very poor. I would like to highlight that a vote for the SNP is a vote for the separation of the UK. They trumpted Ireland as Scotland's role model. They trumpeted Iceland as Scotland's role model. They are both bankrupt and bust.

 

Nah. A vote for the SNP is not a vote for separation. They proved that last time round. Even if they get a referendum bill through this time with help from the Greens, you can veto it on the No campaign.

 

They also trumpeted Norway as a good model. They seem to be doing really well.

[Jaggernaut]

Voting Conservative x2. Would like to see Galloway get in as it would shake the parliament up. Salmond gets his own way too often and the standard of debate at times can be very poor. I would like to highlight that a vote for the SNP is a vote for the separation of the UK. They trumpted Ireland as Scotland's role model. They trumpeted Iceland as Scotland's role model. They are both bankrupt and bust.

I never thought about it like that before.

[Allan Heron]

I'm afraid that's cloud cuckoo land. If the NO vote wins then any discussion about a fairer system will be dead and buried for decades, which is exactly what those who the system suits perfectly (i.e. the two "big" parties) want.

 

Like many others, at first I didn't really know what AV consisted of, but that was because I didn't make the effort to look at what it consists of. It took me a couple of minutes to look at it, and it's clearly superior and fairer than FTOF, sorry, FPTP.

 

So it'll be a YES from me.

 

The main problem is the situation will be the same even if YES wins. AV is undoubtedly better than FPTP but it continues to reflect many of the latter systems downsides.

 

Whilst AV is a "fairer" system it's impact will be relatively limited. It will bring about an extra 60 seats into play as marginals, but there will still be many seats (including many in the West Of Scotland) that remain resolutely safe. And, as noted, it's not proportional which should be a given for any democratic system. Many of the cultural changes being claimed for by the "YES" camp will not happen under AV but they would have to under STV or any other proportional system.

 

Having said that I do think the STV system now in place for local government elections will help to loosen the links to the Labour Party that have been culturally ingrained for too long. The Labour Party in the central belt have long been the conservative party - and it's also been riddled with casual (and some not so casual) corruption for years. Indeed, Iain Gray's pathetic attempt at an election campaign merely reinforces that point.

 

I'll be voting "YES" but it's with many reservations and I'd rather not be having to make a choice between the systems on offer. Equally, though, it's the only one that was ever likely to be made available from either Conservative or Labour and the only opportunity we're likely to have for any voting reform for Westminster in the next few generations.

 

Of course, the ultimate way of getting rid of unfair voting systems in Westminster might well be for Scots to get rid of Westminster!!

[Woodstock Jag]

Spot on Allan.

[macdangerous]

Pretty much in agreement with Alan Heron above, although I take the view that a NO vote changes nothing - there will still be all to argue for with regard to a better arrangement than FPTP.

 

One thing is certain - if the YES vote wins, there will be no chance of a better system being adopted in my lifetime. Kind of finishes the argument for me - if the NO vote wins, there's still something to fight for.

[Jaggernaut]

Pretty much in agreement with Alan Heron above, although I take the view that a NO vote changes nothing - there will still be all to argue for with regard to a better arrangement than FPTP.

 

One thing is certain - if the YES vote wins, there will be no chance of a better system being adopted in my lifetime. Kind of finishes the argument for me - if the NO vote wins, there's still something to fight for.

I'll simply reiterate what I already wrote, which is that I think a NO vote will be used by the powers at be to close the whole issue for decades to come. Yes, some people might fight for it, but they'll be told not to waste any more of the electorate's time, etc etc.

 

Gotta vote YES, THEN fight for a further improvement.

[B.C.G. JAG]

Did somebody say something? I wasn't listening.

[Allan Heron]

Pretty much in agreement with Alan Heron above, although I take the view that a NO vote changes nothing - there will still be all to argue for with regard to a better arrangement than FPTP.

 

One thing is certain - if the YES vote wins, there will be no chance of a better system being adopted in my lifetime. Kind of finishes the argument for me - if the NO vote wins, there's still something to fight for.

 

Totally the wrong way round, I'm afraid. Regardless of the outcome, there will still be something to fight for. Regardless of the outcome, the chance probably won't arise again for a couple of generations at least.

 

If you're of an alternative view, then I'd be interested to know how any further political progress can be made on the other side of a No vote when both Labour and Tories will regard electoral reform as having been dealt with as a consequence of this referendum. You'd need another hung parliament or either a Liberal Democrat or Green majority government to deliver any further reform. That's going to be down to a combination of chance and (from the current standpoint) a considerable stretch of the imagination!!

 

Better half a loaf (or, more accurately about an eighth of a loaf) now than look forward to a feast in 30-40 years long after we've all starved to death.

[Guy Incognito]

Voting Conservative x2. Would like to see Galloway get in as it would shake the parliament up. Salmond gets his own way too often and the standard of debate at times can be very poor. I would like to highlight that a vote for the SNP is a vote for the separation of the UK. They trumpted Ireland as Scotland's role model. They trumpeted Iceland as Scotland's role model. They are both bankrupt and bust.

Um ... how are you able to vote in a Scottish election if you stay in London?

 

Nah. A vote for the SNP is not a vote for separation. They proved that last time round. Even if they get a referendum bill through this time with help from the Greens, you can veto it on the No campaign.

 

They also trumpeted Norway as a good model. They seem to be doing really well.

This.

[KAWB]

Anyone got a link to a grid that says what they plan in their manifestos? I can't be bothered reading them all.

[honved]

Anyone got a link to a grid that says what they plan in their manifestos? I can't be bothered reading them all.

[Jaggernaut]

From Subway to Taxi!

[Steven H]

Will be voting, indeed have already voted, SNP on the constituency and lists and NO to AV. Not exactly a fan of FPTP but prefer it to the alternative being suggested. My constituency has generally been seen as a safe seat for Labour, but they only won it by a nose last time out...hoping they can be ousted this time; although the missus voted Labour so this household just cancels each other out

[Jaggernaut]

Will be voting, indeed have already voted, SNP on the constituency and lists and NO to AV. Not exactly a fan of FPTP but prefer it to the alternative being suggested. My constituency has generally been seen as a safe seat for Labour, but they only won it by a nose last time out...hoping they can be ousted this time; although the missus voted Labour so this household just cancels each other out

Good for you on the SNP!

 

But... if Labour only won by a nose last time, then AV might actually result in a refreshing change from the generations-long safe-seat Labour tradition. So if you really hope that they can be ousted, and not just Labour, but whoever it is that fails to live up to expectations, than it's gotta be a YES to AV.

[Collins Out!]

Won't be voting SNP this time round after their disgraceful handling of the Hollie Greig case.

[Allan Heron]

Will be voting, indeed have already voted, SNP on the constituency and lists and NO to AV. Not exactly a fan of FPTP but prefer it to the alternative being suggested. My constituency has generally been seen as a safe seat for Labour, but they only won it by a nose last time out...hoping they can be ousted this time; although the missus voted Labour so this household just cancels each other out

 

And it'll remain a safe seat under FPTP. I assume it's Glasgow North you're referring to - if so, Labour won it comfortably last time round. AV would make that a marginal seat - indeed, it's the only seat in Glasgow that would move from safe to marginal under AV - but will remain resolutely safe under FPTP

Edited May 5, 2011 by Allan Heron

[Steven H]

Good for you on the SNP!

 

But... if Labour only won by a nose last time, then AV might actually result in a refreshing change from the generations-long safe-seat Labour tradition. So if you really hope that they can be ousted, and not just Labour, but whoever it is that fails to live up to expectations, than it's gotta be a YES to AV.

 

Ah, you spot the flaw I had already considered. Who I want to represent my constituency has not been considered in relation to the AV/FPTP vote at all (bit like not allowing my political views re Partick Thistle influence whether or not I was going to the game on any particular matchday). My reason for the NO vote is because I believe it should be one person one vote, the candidate with the most votes in any one constituency wins. I know, it maintains the status quo for seats that have been relatively safe for years but AV has so many flaws (and admittedly advantages). If my 1st choice candidate is eliminated in round one, 2nd choice out in round two then my 4th choice could effectively be elected and I couldn't say "well I never voted for him/her".

 

Narrow-minded view perhaps, but my thoughts on the AV/FPTP refurendum in terms of preference are so marginal it was always gona be a narrow-minded, what works for my value base consideration that decided which way I was gona go.