The AV Referendum May 2011 - or How to Destroy the LibDems

[Existentialist]

30% cuts to Local Government, cuts to the Health Service, cuts to Education, riots on the streets - the first few months of the Tory-led government have been typically brutal and divisive.  So how can they be got rid of?

Clearly the LibDems are first in the firing line for propping up this weak and nasty government.  If the LibDems can be broken, the Government falls.  So how can the LibDems be destroyed?

The May 2011 referendum is the next big opportunity to bring about the early demise of the LibDems.  They have staked everything on the chance to change the voting system - and the Tories have sold them a con in the process.  The biggest effect of the proposed changes being voted on in May 2011 will be to rig the constituency boundaries to favour the Tories and disadvantage Labour.  This is the part of the package that the Tories have insisted on, because they are feeling the pinch from the total retreat of the Tory vote to the heartlands of England and with next to no Tory representation happening any more in Scotland - just 1 seat out of 59.  But the LibDems have long held out the hope of gaining more seats through proportional representation.

Now I am in favour of proportional representation - a truly proportional system that returns up to 650 representatives in exactly the proportions voted for by the electorate, with a minimum threshold of 1/650th of the vote being necessary to elect one representative.  That, to my mind, is democracy.  Not the revolting proposals acceded to by the ultra-weak LibDem Leader Nick Clegg.  The Alternative Vote system does not produce proportional representation and it is not even a step in the right direction.  Getting rid of the Government is the only step in the right direction that needs to be taken.

If the AV referendum on May 5th, 2011 is lost, the Liberal Democrat Party as a whole really will begin to wonder what on earth they are doing supporting this vile Government.  If the morsel of compromise that has been held out to them by the Conservatives is taken away, then the process of collapse will begin in earnest.  What exactly will happen is anyone's guess - their party has already committed electoral suicide and a vote rejecting AV on May 5th is their only forlorn hope of saving some of their representation in the planned 2015 election.  But if they don't even get their rigged boundary changes through on May 5th - their situation looks really bleak.  I cannot imagine the torture that they will endure for the remainder of this parliament, nor the pleasure that the experience will give me.

Vote No to the Alternative Vote on May 5th - and let's get rid of this sick anomaly of a Government.

[Whitney]

I was confused till I saw 'Tories' and realized you weren't talking about the US.

[Existentialist]

Thanks Whitney for your contribution.  Any views?  The overthrow of nasty governments is a worldwide issue.

[LegendarySandwich]

Can you explain what country this is in and what exactly is going on? Like Whitney, I live in the US, and, sadly, I'm not too up-to-date on the politics of other countries.

[McQ]

You guys need a constitution.

Then, at least you'd have something that everyone could point to and scream about how "the other guys" are destroying it. We can give you some pointers on that.

 

[Existentialist]

Can you explain what country this is in and what exactly is going on? Like Whitney, I live in the US, and, sadly, I'm not too up-to-date on the politics of other countries.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain matters in more detail.

The Tory Party (who officially call themselves the Conservative Party) is the main right-wing party in England.  Right-wing in this context means authoritarian, reducing the size of the state, nationalistic, pro-tradition, very pro-monarchy, anti-union and anti-student.  I said they are in England because the Tories hardly managed to get any voters in Scotland to vote to send representatives to the House of Commons which is the elected chamber of the UK Parliament.  

In Scotland, the Tories managed to get only 1 UK Parliament seat out of a total of 59 Scottish seats in the 650-seat House of Commons in the 2010 general election.  Nearly all the Tories’ seats in Parliament are in England, just a few in Wales, and zero in Northern Ireland.  

Members of Parliament are each elected from their geographical area known as a constituency, and these are spaced out all over England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.  For over a century the Member of Parliament has always been elected by the highest vote achieved for one of several candidates in each constituency, each voter having placed a single cross beside their favoured candidate’s name on the ballot paper.

For decades the Liberal Democrats have campaigned to change this system, because it results in a disproportionately high number of Tory and Labour candidates being elected when compared to the proportions of votes for each party counted up nationally.  In 2010 the Lib Dems got their chance to influence policy because the Tories, who are in long-term decline relative to their past strength, didn’t manage to achieve the 326 seats they needed in the House of Commons to drive through their policies unaided as the sole governing party.  They only got 307 seats, about 20 short of an overall majority of MPs in Parliament.

The Tories have managed to secure the LibDems support in Parliament for 5 years in a Coalition Government, which means the Tories’ 307 seats are added to the LibDems’ 57 to make an overall majority in parliament.  But the bribe the Tories offered the Liberal Democrats was a referendum on changing the election system so the parliamentary seats would be more proportionate to the proportion of votes cast nationally than they are under the present voting system.  In principle this is a good idea because it is intrinsically unfair that any party should get a majority of seats in parliament on the basis of a minority of votes in the country, which is usually the process by which we end up with a majority Tory or majority Labour Government as we have in the past.

In practice, the Tories are tricksters and have shafted the Lib Dem dream of actual proportional representation in two ways.  Firstly the question in the referendum will be about the Alternative Vote system whereby we still have one constituency per MP, but instead of simply counting up the highest number of votes, the winning candidate must now achieve 50% of the vote in their constituency.  This will be achieved by making voters choose 2nd and 3rd preferences, and then redistributing the votes of the lowest-polling candidates to their second prefences after a second, third or fourth count of the votes, until one candidate has achieved more than 50% of the votes, meaning their own first-preference votes plus the second, third or fourth preference votes of the worst losing candidates.

Not only does this sound more like a lesson in bizarre mathematics than a voting process, it also means that the voters of the lowest-voting parties (usually fascists and nutters) get to have their vote counted twice, but the result usually fails to achieve what the Liberal Democrats have always wanted â€" i.e. proportional representation.  That’s the first way they’ve been shafted.

The second way the Tories have shafted the Lib Dems is to insist the referendum on the AV system is coupled in the same referendum question with a proposal to re-draw boundaries so that each constituency has pretty much exactly the same number of voters as every other constituency in the country.  This all sounds very egalitarian until you realise the Tories’ real motivation, which is that re-drawing the boundaries in this way is more likely to produce more Tory MPs than at present simply because of the way the Tory vote happens to be distributed nationwide.

It’s pretty obvious that the Tories don’t really want this to change to happen at all because really they would prefer the present system, but if they are going to have an alternative system then they would at least like to rig it to their advantage, hence the boundary changes.  

What I’m saying is that the rights and wrongs of the proposal are irrelevant.  With their vote-rigging agenda about boundary sizes, and their insistence on the Referendum Question being about the Alternative Vote and not the Single Transferable Vote system (which does tend to be proportional), it is laughable that the Tories and Lib Dems have dared to affront the British electorate with a referendum about it at all.  The whole proposal is a pig’s ear, it’s a mess, a travesty of common sense and a complete waste of time and money.

The only advantage now of a referendum to Labour voters or anyone on the Left is its role as a wedge to drive between the Tories and Liberal Democrats in their sordid little Coalition government, which nobody voted for and is just a marriage of convenience for the Tories.  If the Lib Dems lose the refendum, and I hope to God they do (said for dramatic effect and not to be taken literally), they will lose all credibility and will be totally demoralised, while their false friends the Tories continue with the student-bashing, worker-bashing class war whose sole purpose is to serve the rich while slashing the pay, jobs, housing and benefits of the poor.

This is a time of hope, and we have a choice.  We must send the Lib Dems packing with their embarrassed tails between their legs, and with any luck deprive the Tories of the only support that enables them to maintain their nasty agenda in Parliament and the Country.  Anybody who has a vote in the referendum on AV on May 5th, 2011 should vote No.

[TheJackel]

Can you explain what country this is in and what exactly is going on? Like Whitney, I live in the US, and, sadly, I'm not too up-to-date on the politics of other countries.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain matters in more detail.

The Tory Party (who officially call themselves the Conservative Party) is the main right-wing party in England.  Right-wing in this context means authoritarian, reducing the size of the state, nationalistic, pro-tradition, very pro-monarchy, anti-union and anti-student.  I said they are in England because the Tories hardly managed to get any voters in Scotland to vote to send representatives to the House of Commons which is the elected chamber of the UK Parliament.  

In Scotland, the Tories managed to get only 1 UK Parliament seat out of a total of 59 Scottish seats in the 650-seat House of Commons in the 2010 general election.  Nearly all the Tories’ seats in Parliament are in England, just a few in Wales, and zero in Northern Ireland.  

Members of Parliament are each elected from their geographical area known as a constituency, and these are spaced out all over England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.  For over a century the Member of Parliament has always been elected by the highest vote achieved for one of several candidates in each constituency, each voter having placed a single cross beside their favoured candidate’s name on the ballot paper.

For decades the Liberal Democrats have campaigned to change this system, because it results in a disproportionately high number of Tory and Labour candidates being elected when compared to the proportions of votes for each party counted up nationally.  In 2010 the Lib Dems got their chance to influence policy because the Tories, who are in long-term decline relative to their past strength, didn’t manage to achieve the 326 seats they needed in the House of Commons to drive through their policies unaided as the sole governing party.  They only got 307 seats, about 20 short of an overall majority of MPs in Parliament.

The Tories have managed to secure the LibDems support in Parliament for 5 years in a Coalition Government, which means the Tories’ 307 seats are added to the LibDems’ 57 to make an overall majority in parliament.  But the bribe the Tories offered the Liberal Democrats was a referendum on changing the election system so the parliamentary seats would be more proportionate to the proportion of votes cast nationally than they are under the present voting system.  In principle this is a good idea because it is intrinsically unfair that any party should get a majority of seats in parliament on the basis of a minority of votes in the country, which is usually the process by which we end up with a majority Tory or majority Labour Government as we have in the past.

In practice, the Tories are tricksters and have shafted the Lib Dem dream of actual proportional representation in two ways.  Firstly the question in the referendum will be about the Alternative Vote system whereby we still have one constituency per MP, but instead of simply counting up the highest number of votes, the winning candidate must now achieve 50% of the vote in their constituency.  This will be achieved by making voters choose 2nd and 3rd preferences, and then redistributing the votes of the lowest-polling candidates to their second prefences after a second, third or fourth count of the votes, until one candidate has achieved more than 50% of the votes, meaning their own first-preference votes plus the second, third or fourth preference votes of the worst losing candidates.

Not only does this sound more like a lesson in bizarre mathematics than a voting process, it also means that the voters of the lowest-voting parties (usually fascists and nutters) get to have their vote counted twice, but the result usually fails to achieve what the Liberal Democrats have always wanted â€" i.e. proportional representation.  That’s the first way they’ve been shafted.

The second way the Tories have shafted the Lib Dems is to insist the referendum on the AV system is coupled in the same referendum question with a proposal to re-draw boundaries so that each constituency has pretty much exactly the same number of voters as every other constituency in the country.  This all sounds very egalitarian until you realise the Tories’ real motivation, which is that re-drawing the boundaries in this way is more likely to produce more Tory MPs than at present simply because of the way the Tory vote happens to be distributed nationwide.

It’s pretty obvious that the Tories don’t really want this to change to happen at all because really they would prefer the present system, but if they are going to have an alternative system then they would at least like to rig it to their advantage, hence the boundary changes.  

What I’m saying is that the rights and wrongs of the proposal are irrelevant.  With their vote-rigging agenda about boundary sizes, and their insistence on the Referendum Question being about the Alternative Vote and not the Single Transferable Vote system (which does tend to be proportional), it is laughable that the Tories and Lib Dems have dared to affront the British electorate with a referendum about it at all.  The whole proposal is a pig’s ear, it’s a mess, a travesty of common sense and a complete waste of time and money.

The only advantage now of a referendum to Labour voters or anyone on the Left is its role as a wedge to drive between the Tories and Liberal Democrats in their sordid little Coalition government, which nobody voted for and is just a marriage of convenience for the Tories.  If the Lib Dems lose the refendum, and I hope to God they do (said for dramatic effect and not to be taken literally), they will lose all credibility and will be totally demoralised, while their false friends the Tories continue with the student-bashing, worker-bashing class war whose sole purpose is to serve the rich while slashing the pay, jobs, housing and benefits of the poor.

This is a time of hope, and we have a choice.  We must send the Lib Dems packing with their embarrassed tails between their legs, and with any luck deprive the Tories of the only support that enables them to maintain their nasty agenda in Parliament and the Country.  Anybody who has a vote in the referendum on AV on May 5th, 2011 should vote No.

The religious right here are attempting to do similar things in various states. Right now there is a growing push for a Christian theocracy to where christian churches and schools are teaching their students that this nation was a Christian nation, and founded by Christians for the purpose of their religion.

[Existentialist]

You guys need a constitution.

Then, at least you'd have something that everyone could point to and scream about how "the other guys" are destroying it. We can give you some pointers on that.

 :cool:

[Existentialist]

The religious wright here are attempting to do similar things in various states. Right now there is a growing push for a Christian theocracy to where christian churches and schools are teaching their students that this nation was a Christian nation, and founded by Christians for the purpose of their religion.

That sounds terrible.  History is determined by those who write it, I suppose.  Time for atheists to get scribbling!

On the subject of the tortuous demise of the UK's Liberal Democrats, their unpopularity for joining a right-wing Conservative Government and allowing themselves to be duped into supporting a vicious policy of the redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich is illustrated by a review of the last 6 months' polling intentions.  The Liberal Democrats poll rating is shown by the orange line steadily heading downwards.  At this rate, they will have zero support anyway by May 5th, 2011, and my cunning plan to obliterate them by losing them their precious referendum, as a way of getting rid of their credibility, will be redundant.

The Liberal Democrat Party is heading for the biggest crisis in its 150-year history.  We may be witnessing its final demise and the fall of this shameful government can't be long to follow.  It's a pity for the Liberal Democrats because for the last 40 years they have presented themselves as a major party of the Centre-Left.  By betraying the trust of many who voted for them in the 2010 Election on this basis, by teaming up with the Tories in a right-wing onslaught on homes, jobs and people they have thrown it all away.

[McQ]

You guys need a constitution.

Then, at least you'd have something that everyone could point to and scream about how "the other guys" are destroying it. We can give you some pointers on that.

 :cool:

It's a jest. Meant to be taken in jest.

[Existentialist]

It's a jest. Meant to be taken in jest.

I know, that's why it was cool!