There is a referendum today in the UK on whether to change the voting system by which Members of Parliament are elected, from the first-past-the-post system currently in use, to the Alternative Vote (AV) system.
My understanding of the situation is this:
With the current system, theoretically a candidate with even only 30% of the vote in a constituency would be declared winner if none of the other candidates have individually been able to amass up to 30% of the constituency's vote. What this in effect means is that although 70% of voters have not voted for him, the candidate with 30% of the vote is declared the winner and the voices of 70% of his constituency although spread out among the various other candidates, are unheard.
With the AV system however, voters are given the opportunity to vote for all of the candidates in the election by order of preference. At the first count the candidate with the most first preference votes, if they carried up to 50% of the vote, is declared winner. If they don't carry up to 50% the candidate with the least number of first preference votes is eliminated and his votes distributed among the other candidates by order of preference. The elimination of the candidate with the least number of preference votes continues until the object of achieving 50% of the vote by the leading candidate is arrived at, such that there is a guarantee that every Member of Parliament under AV would have the support and be the favoured candidate of at least 50% of the voters in their constituency.
This seems to me like a much fairer system than the current first-past-the-post system. Also, scare tactics aside, the arguments that have been advanced by the 'NO' campaign have been weak and unconvincing, especially since I know that in all of the elections at which I have voted under the current system, my vote has never counted.
Moreover, under AV, politicians will be made to work harder for votes, rather than relying mostly on their core supporters' votes as they currently do. They would need voters who would not ordinarily vote for them to consider voting them as second preference etc. And it can only be a good thing if canvassers from all parties had to come knocking on my door, one after the other, to canvass for my vote and and try to persuade me by giving me the reasons why I should vote for their candidate. AV empowers the electorate in a way that first-past-the-post could never do.
So YES it is for me.
.jpg)
