Vote switch a winner for Lib Dems: Party would take five extra Yorkshire seats under AV

It may be a simple question, but wading your way through claim and counter-claim of the campaigning is far from an easy task and apathy is in danger of winning the day.

Ditching the first-past-the-post system would allow extremists in, say those voting “No” to scrapping it in favour of the Alternative Vote (AV). Ridiculous, say “Yes” campaigners – after all BNP leader Nick Griffin is voting “No”.

Introducing AV would cost £250m and is a huge waste of money, says the “No” campaign. Ludicrous – the costs would be much less, comes the response.

AV would be fairer, say supporters – but critics ask what is fair about some people appearing to have more votes than others?

And so it goes on. But behind the largely negative campaigning lies a question which could change the political map of Yorkshire.

Under the current first-past-the-post system the candidate with the most votes wins. But under the Additional Vote, voters would rank candidates in order of preference. If no-one gets 50 per cent of votes, the contender with the fewest votes will be knocked out and people who voted for them will have their second preferences counted instead. The process continues until one candidate secures 50 per cent of support.

Travel back a year, and after the euphoria of Cleggmania Liberal Democrats were left disappointed to win only three seats in the region at the General Election – and take only 57 across the country, despite polling only two million fewer votes than Labour.

But had the 2010 election been fought using the Additional Vote the Lib Dems would have walked away with an extra five in this region alone, according to academics who have crunched the numbers and both major parties would have lost out.

Instead of Labour holding on to Hull North and Sheffield Central by a thread, they would have been won by the Lib Dems, according to the British Election Study (BES) carried out by the University of Essex.

Both seats were major Lib Dem targets, and under the current system they came tantalisingly close. In Hull North, Labour MP Diana Johnson’s majority was slashed from 7,351 to 641, while in Sheffield Central Lib Dem council leader Paul Scriven cut Labour’s majority from 7,055 to just 165.

The experts – basing their work on an extensive survey of how voters would have used their other preferences – calculate that the Lib Dems would also have held onto Harrogate and Knaresborough, where their 10,000 majority was overturned by the Tories, and beaten David Cameron’s candidates in York Outer and Colne Valley.

In total, AV would have seen 10 fewer Labour MPs, 22 fewer Tories and an extra 32 Lib Dems, although sceptics point out the study ignores local issues.

“This outcome would have radically changed the arithmetic of post-election coalition formation. In effect, the Liberal Democrats would have been able to form a majority coalition with either Labour or the Conservatives.”

Despite the academics suggesting he would not now be in parliament if the election had been fought under AV, Labour’s Sheffield Central MP Paul Blomfield is supporting the “Yes” campaign, which argues the system is fairer, will make MPs work harder because they need 50 per cent of votes and reduce the number of safe seats.

“It’s not about me,” he said. “It’s about having a fairer voting system. I think that AV enables people to express their political preferences in the way they want to rather than being forced to choose tactically between candidates.”

But critics argue AV would be expensive to introduce, is complicated and is unfair because it gives some people – particularly those voting for extreme candidates – more votes than others.

“Even Nick Clegg calls this a miserable compromise,” said Bradford West MP Marsha Singh. “It’s not Proportional Representation in any shape or form and I don’t think people in Britain want their second or third or fourth choice being elected because they’re not really voting for them.

“The campaign for universal suffrage was for one person one voter. This is one person 10 votes – it’s ridiculous.”

Another study for the New Economics Foundation think-tank concluded that under AV four of the region’s constituencies would become “very marginal” rather than simply “marginal” – Beverley and Holderness, Cleethorpes, Leeds North West, and Selby and Ainsty. Another four would move from “fairly safe” to “marginal” – Elmet and Rothwell, Haltemprice and Howden, Keighley and Pudsey.

The last time the entire country had their say in a referendum was in 1975, when the issue was whether to stay in the European Economic Community. Two-thirds of people voted in favour with a turnout of 65 per cent – a figure which is highly unlikely to be matched this time around as a public distracted by economic concerns struggles to engage and polls suggesting turnout could be as low as 20 per cent in some areas.

Labour may be the party split on the issue, but it is David Cameron and Nick Clegg who fear the result. On results are announced on May 6, one of them will be left with an angry party to deal with as a “No” vote leaves Lib Dems asking what is left for them in the coalition and a “Yes” leaves a furious Tory right asking why the Prime Minister buckled to the demands of a junior partner.

There is plenty at stake in this referendum – but apathy remains the biggest obstacle in the way of the two campaigns.