Essay:No2AV

Update: The AV referendum failed with the "no" vote gaining massive support. Yes I am bitter over it, not least because it's pushed electoral reform back 30-40 years at least. The No2AV campaign was dishonest and misleading, and frankly, ran by utter scum.

When asked to vote in the referendum on electoral reform and the Alternative Vote, vote NO. Here are 8 good reasons to say NO 2 AV:

1) Change is a frightening prospect.

Switching to AV is a "supposedly" small change to something that has worked so well for us for many years. Remember all those other sweeping changes made to the electoral process and how bad they were? Changes like when voting was opened to more than just landowners, or even that horrible change where they dared to give women the vote! Change is bad and we say "if it ain't broke don't fix it". Sure, some people may view a system where an MP can gain a seat where 70% their voters voted against them is actually broken, but what do they know. AV also causes cancer.

2) AV is difficult to understand.

We at the No2AV campaign see AV as a very complex and difficult option. We don't think the great unwashed masses out there will be able to comprehend an idea as convoluted as "put 1 for your first preference and 2 for your second preference". Converting an X into a number is a hard task for us - and we're the smart ones who's job it is to understand this! And AV adds an even bigger layer of complexity in that the preferences aren't compulsory. Voters have the option of voting for just one person as well as ranking preferences. We don't know about you, but that's a mentally exhausting task and we need a lie down after just thinking about it! How all those other places that use this system cope, from elections within parliament itself to hundreds of students union elections to the whole of Austrialia, we will never know.

3) AV will cost us money.

Who cares if the £250 million scaremongering figure is completely made up? We could end up spending that much money on voting machines in the distant future, who knows? ANY penny spent on switching to AV could be spent on better things. Things like financing Barclay's 1% corporation tax, or Vodafone's £4 billion tax break, or bird houses for a few MPs. And lets not forget the salaries of all those brave front line people who are working out how to cut tax-funded services - they need a salary so they can close down Sure Start Centres, not an alternative vote. Don't let money that won't be spent on the Alternative Vote be not spent on hospitals, schools and welfare!

4) AV will end tactical voting.

For years, the Labour and Conservative parties have been campaigning on the basis that a vote for the Liberal Democrats would let the other party in. Under the first-past-the-post system, this brilliant display of tactics serves us remarkably well - by keeping those stinking super-lefties out through fear. Switching to AV could see the end of such imaginative tactical voting. This would also mean that local election campaigns may need to come up with something original, or perhaps even a reason to vote for them, rather than against their opponents. We don't want that, do we?

5) First-past-the-post keeps power away from fringe groups.

AV supporters see that the grossly disproportionate results of the current electoral system as a disadvantage, with smaller parties actively under-represented and with no hope of achieving even a minor victory. But this is actually an advantage! Who wants lunatic fringe parties like the Greens, or the Liberal Democrats getting through to have any power? Exactly. Make sure to vote No "2" (see what we did there? Told you we were clever!) AV and make sure that politics can only be dominated by those big parties that ceased to give much of a shit a long time ago.

6) AV produces unstable governments.

The FPTP system has never, ever, under any circumstances in the history of UK politics produced a hung parliament. No. Never. At all. Nip, nadda. Coalition governments in the UK are completely unheard of.

7) FPTP allows parties to deliver a manifesto.

With a higher risk of coalition governments under AV, it's possible that people may experience a manifesto that they didn't vote for. With strong, fully supported governments under FPTP, politicians deliver exactly what they promised. Remember Tony Blair promising not to introduce "top-up" fees, that was delivered to the electorate swiftly and effectively. We need a strong government, which means enforcing unchanged manifestos on the entire population - even if the majority didn't actually vote for it.

8) AV is a fraud.

AV is not proportional representation. STV is. Unfortunately, STV isn't on offer for various reasons but that shouldn't stop us mentioning it. Anyone wanting to vote for AV should really want STV instead. So by the logic that if apples are better than bananas and bananas are better than oranges and therefore oranges are better than apples, you must vote no "2" (hee hee!!) AV.