Reform of voting system will make it more democratic

THERE seems to be a great deal of confusion in relation to the proposed electoral reform. In particular those opposed to the Alternative Vote method, claim the present system represents the will of the people. It does not.

Since 1945, no successful party has polled more than 50 per cent of the votes even when they have ended up with large majorities in Parliament. The result is that most of the electorate are disenfranchised.

With the proposed reform, that disenfranchised majority will still have some say in who is to represent them.

Some people do not like coalitions on the basis that the coalition parties have to compromise some of their principles; but that is exactly what happens at present. All the major parties are coalitions of people often with very diverse views, for example, on Europe.

The difference between the two systems is that up until last year the compromises took place before the election whereas when there is a hung parliament further compromise has to take place after the election.

There is no problem with this and it is more open and clearer to the electorate just what is being compromised. The AV system would take into account more electors’ views and would therefore be more democratic.

From: James Baker, Longfellow Court, Mytholmroyd, Hebden Bridge.

IT’S now been confirmed that a referendum will take place on May 5.

People will have a vote on whether they wish to change to the Alternative Vote system. I’m hoping there will be a serious debate as to the merits of each system. I was therefore saddened to see that NO2AV have launched their campaign with a cynical attack on the costs of AV.

They claim AV will cost us £250m, which for comparison is about two days worth of interest payments on our national debt.

In reaching this pie in the sky figure they have included the £90m cost of the referendum, but this cost will be incurred whatever choice people make.

They also include £120m for counting machines, even though AV, if chosen, could still be counted by hand.

If we did decide to invest £120m in counting machines, then like washing machines they might prove to be efficient labour saving devices.

With such misleading figures launching their campaign, will they develop the bottle for a real debate?

From: Alan Carcas, Cornmill Lane, Liversedge.

IF we change to the Alternative Vote (AV) system, never again will the voters get the Government they vote for. Second preference is simply second choice. Third, fourth, fifth and sixth preferences, etc, are just the hedging of bets.

With FPTP we get a result – even if it is a coalition – which in itself is an indication of voter uncertainty, but keeps government going.

AV would create permanent coalition, with voters’ second, third, and worse choices, deciding who governs, which would not be a long-term indication of voters’ wishes.