Home | Links | .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) | Videos | Oxted Paris Cycle Ride | Scarlett | Site notices

About This Site

A personal weblog with photographs and comments. Quiet ramblings, quite rambling...


Login | Register | Why?


Advanced Search

Most recent entries

Recent entries with comments



Monthly Archives


Lately listening to

Site Statistics

Site Credits

Next entry: Up in the clouds

Previous entry: Spring Lambs

Saturday, 30 April 2011
Can I haz the AV?

Is your cat confused about the upcoming referendum? (via b3ta).

Posted by bigblue on 30/04/2011 at 12:29 PM
Filed under: EuropeUnited KingdomEngland • (4) CommentsPermalinkBookmark or Share

We have had preferential voting for nearly 100 years. Obviously a better system, it also has a few drawbacks.
Leaving that aside, this video is misleading in its key message: tactical voting.  It is common under this system for political parties to hand out “how to vote” cards that tell their supporters how to direct their preferences.  Because party political machines are “infallible” this can never, ever, go wrong.  When all of a set of party-directed votes are exhausted or misdirected before the final candidate is elected this has eventuated in unanticipated results, such as the election of Pauline Hanson in the 1990s to the Senate, or the “independents” Nick Xenophon and Stephen Fielding in the 2000s.  All three of those Senators have gone on to generally muck things up; knowing they could never be reelected again they’ve had nothing to lose.  All thanks to Labor Party preferences trying to keep the more moderate candidate (seen as the real threat) out at all costs.  So does preferential voting eliminate tactical voting?  No, but (I will admit) in more cases than not it does reduce it.

Posted by flank  on  30/04/2011  at  11:14 PM

We are told by our “No to AV” campaign that the AV system is only used by Australia and Fuji, that Fuji is changing from AV and that nobody in Australia likes it.

Posted by bigblue  on  02/05/2011  at  06:52 PM

Strange that, I’ve not once heard anyone complaining about preference voting.  I often hear people talking about how they are going to distribute their preferences.  I think the universal consensus is that it improves the mandate received by the elected person.  A corollary to that is that when someone knows they received a large block of distributed preferences from a particular quarter then they usually act to respect those preferences.

On the other hand I have heard a few mumbles about our compulsory voting system.  It might compound the problems presented in Lindsay Tanner’s recent book.

Posted by flank  on  03/05/2011  at  11:06 PM

OK, I found an Australian website with a lot of information about AV:

Posted by bigblue  on  05/05/2011  at  09:53 PM

To post a comment Login or Register (Why?)