WE are now to vote on the “AV”
versus “first past the post”
system to elect our government.
We are, I imagine, expected to be conversant with both these systems, even though the politicians themselves appear to be clueless about them.
The “first past the post”
supporters tell us we have one vote each while blithely ignoring the fact that landowners and businesses have a vote in each and every constituency in which they have property — hardly fair.
The “AV” supporters claim their system gives us all fair representation, even though some will have their votes counted more times than others — also hardly fair.
The fairest system by far, is the one used in France to elect their president. The “AV” supporters will claim that their’s is the same system streamlined to eliminate the need for a second vote and therefore save on expense. This is not the case, as the voters are denied the chance to decide without the possibility of multiple choice, which is always subject to being manipulated.
The problem is made worse by there being no requirement for a minimum turnout of, say, 50 per cent of electors, not an unreasonable number.
The problem of fair representation is made worse by the emergence of the political elite, a “them and us” situation.
The so-called democracies of the west such as the USA where, as we all know, any multimillionaire can become president, and now here, where any privately educated son or daughter of a rich man can become Prime Minister, must put us on our guard against even more lack of accountability in our voting system.
Mr F Isherwood Latham Road Blackrod
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article