View Single Post
Old 21-02-2011, 18:47   #24
ntluser
Inactive
 
ntluser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 78
Services: Virgin Media XL Telephone,TV with Tivo box & Superhub3 upto 150Mb Broadband, Sky World, & Freeview+
Posts: 1,901
ntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of societyntluser is a pillar of society
Smile Re: The CF Referendum on Electoral Reform

The problem with both these systems of voting is that neither one compels voters to vote.

Nor does either system stop parties from forming coalitions if necessary.

The advantage of AV over FPTP is that you do have an idea what each voters second preference would be and gives parties a rough idea of what policies to concentrate on to best meet voters' requirements.

Maybe future elections would require parties to state in advance what common policies they would pursue in the event of a coalition with another party.

People object to some of the coalition policies because they do not match the manifesto or platform they stood on in the election but coalition policies are compromise policies and do not necessarily represent or accurately represent voter interests.

It would have been interesting to see what the policies would have been for Lab-Con & Lib-Lab coalitions.

Whichever system is chosen I hope they make voting compulsory and provide voters with a legal option not to vote for any party.
ntluser is offline