The Alternative Vote System

The Alternative Vote System, or AV, is to be voted on in England and Wales to replace the traditional first past the post system, which is used also by the vast majority of democracies across the world.

The reasoning behind the first past the post system is simple – that the person who gets the most votes is plainly the favourite, whereas in whatever cases the AV System made any difference that person would not be elected. Also, apparently the first past the post system is cheaper to run than the AV system, in the short-term at least.

Cost of running an AV election

Estimates of the cost of an election under an Alternate Vote system range from:

£250 million - this estimate appears to come from various opponents to AV voting,

to Nick Clegg's - deputy prime minister and liberal party leader - estimate of £120 million whether for AV voting or first past the post.

Naturally, one would look for significant benefits from any extra expenditure.

Intended benefits

The Alternative Vote System is intended to address the matter that many elected councillors and MPs who, while attracting the largest vote as the first choice, are disliked so much and by so many other people that their election polarises the political system and the nation.

It is directed at a scenario where a candidate is elected by a strong, though minority, vote over other candidates with broader appeal who between them had split the majority vote.

If each elected MP had to overcome the additional testing by the AV System they would by definition be far more acceptable to their total electorate, not merely to their supporters. Unless a candidate were an outstanding choice then they would likely be no one’s favourite yet they might be recognised in due course as the natural compromise. After all, unless we agree on the candidate selected then a compromise could the next best solution.

Naturally, the benefit of AV voting should not be merely that we might have nicer people in Parliament, but that the elected MPs will comprise a government and opposition that will more closely represent the will, and more effectively meet the needs, of the people.

Perhaps the greatest benefit is that each individual will more likely elect an MP closer to their needs more of the time.

Effect on the political parties

Where there is a decisive shift in voting patterns the major political parties will, of course, adapt quickly by selecting as candidates people who would more likely be elected. They will be more inclined to select candidates with a much broader appeal, in order to maximise their votes. Therefore, the political parties themselves will have to change, since they will be represented by the elected Members of Parliament. Those MPs will have more broadly acceptable views, and the parties' policies will have to change. Perhaps the parties' relationships with their major supporters will change, and they might find different supporters.

This effect could in time finally offer a government for all the people.

How alternative voting works

As I have seen several different explanations on this topic - and surely they cannot all be right - I can only direct you to a site that I am sure must be correct: http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/first-past-post-and-alternative-vote-explained.

Decision time

Is all this trouble and expenditure really worthwhile to choose those who would direct the structure of a nation and its infrastructure, the well-being of and opportunities for the people, and the path that the nation will follow?