Do You Understand That? I Didn't
Friday 18th February, 2011 14:51 Comments: 1
David Cameron has given a speech about AV. In it he raises the point that AV is unclear and difficult to understand:
Second, AV is unclear.
There's a brilliant simplicity to first-past-the-post.
You walk into a polling booth, put a cross against someone's name, drop the paper in a ballot box - and the person who gets the most votes wins.
That goes out the window with AV.
It's not my job to tell you exactly how the system works - that's for the 'yes' campaign to explain.
But even if it was my job, I'll be honest with you, I don't think I could.
Yes, there's a superficial simplicity in getting people to rank candidates in an order of preference...
...and redistributing votes until someone gets fifty percent.
But it's a lot more complicated than that.
Here's a passage from a book detailing how the Alternative Vote system works:
"As the process continues the preferences allocated to the remaining candidates may not be the second choices of those electors whose first-choice candidates have been eliminated. It may be that after three candidates have been eliminated, say, when a fourth candidate is removed from the contest one of the electors who gave her first preference to him gave her second, third and fourth preferences to the three other candidates who have already been eliminated, so her fifth preference is then allocated to one of the remaining candidates."
Do you understand that?
I didn't. And I've read it many times.
And I don't think we should replace a system that everyone gets with one that's only understood by a handful of elites.
Shouldn't I be worried that my Prime Minister doesn't understand how the relatively simple AV system works when he makes hundreds (if not thousands) of complicated decisions? He apparently came bottom in Latin and Maths at Heatherdown, an exclusive preparatory school, so I guess logic might not be a strong point.
AV isn't particularly difficult to understand. Personally, I think I'd prefer STV, but at least this is a step in the right direction.
http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=55
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vote_referendum,_2011
Second, AV is unclear.
There's a brilliant simplicity to first-past-the-post.
You walk into a polling booth, put a cross against someone's name, drop the paper in a ballot box - and the person who gets the most votes wins.
That goes out the window with AV.
It's not my job to tell you exactly how the system works - that's for the 'yes' campaign to explain.
But even if it was my job, I'll be honest with you, I don't think I could.
Yes, there's a superficial simplicity in getting people to rank candidates in an order of preference...
...and redistributing votes until someone gets fifty percent.
But it's a lot more complicated than that.
Here's a passage from a book detailing how the Alternative Vote system works:
"As the process continues the preferences allocated to the remaining candidates may not be the second choices of those electors whose first-choice candidates have been eliminated. It may be that after three candidates have been eliminated, say, when a fourth candidate is removed from the contest one of the electors who gave her first preference to him gave her second, third and fourth preferences to the three other candidates who have already been eliminated, so her fifth preference is then allocated to one of the remaining candidates."
Do you understand that?
I didn't. And I've read it many times.
And I don't think we should replace a system that everyone gets with one that's only understood by a handful of elites.
Shouldn't I be worried that my Prime Minister doesn't understand how the relatively simple AV system works when he makes hundreds (if not thousands) of complicated decisions? He apparently came bottom in Latin and Maths at Heatherdown, an exclusive preparatory school, so I guess logic might not be a strong point.
AV isn't particularly difficult to understand. Personally, I think I'd prefer STV, but at least this is a step in the right direction.
http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=55
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vote_referendum,_2011
Robert - Tuesday 8th March, 2011 09:46 In the interest of fairness, here's an article on the BBC News website written by Matthew Elliott, Director of No to AV: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12486153
It is, however, mostly bo!!ocks.
It is, however, mostly bo!!ocks.