Comments on: Pickles’ selective citation on AV

By: UK Electoral Reform. If not now, then when? | m i s c e l l a n i . o r g

UK Electoral Reform. If not now, then when? | m i s c e l l a n i . o r g — Wed, 12 May 2010 10:24:52 +0000

[...] Pickles’ selective citation on AV (leftfootforward.org) [...]

By: Democratic Society

Democratic Society — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:59:53 +0000

Noted: Pickles’ selective citation on AV http://bit.ly/aLUZQ6

By: Danny C

Danny C — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:17:03 +0000

RT @leftfootfwd: Pickles’ selective citation on AV: http://is.gd/89882

By: Vote For A Change

Vote For A Change — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:32:03 +0000

RT @leftfootfwd: Pickles’ selective citation on AV: http://is.gd/89882

By: Vote For A Change

Vote For A Change — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:31:38 +0000

RT @shamikdas: Dear Mr @Ericpickles, do you have the slightest idea what you're talking about? RT @leftfootfwd: Pickles’ v odd views AV: http://is.gd/89882

By: Vote For A Change

Vote For A Change — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:29:09 +0000

@gjcsouthsea Here's a great debunking of the basis of this video: http://bit.ly/dru5PN

By: Gary

Gary — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:24:38 +0000

I think you’ve hit on a real problem here with AV though but not made the point explicitly. Because, broadly, we have two liberal-left parties in the UK and one right wing one the major affect of AV would be to disproportionately harm the Conservatives while benefitting Labour and especially Lib Dem.

You cite 1983, ’87 and ’92 as instances of where AV was more proportional that FPTP but that’s only because the Conservatives won. Under FPTP that basically means they were overrepresented and because AV harms the Conservatives, it has the overall effect of making the result look more proportional. Actually, since the difference is only a small number of seats it’s not significantly more proportional anyway.

However, if you look at the election of 1997 and those since then, you’ll see that Labour are vastly overrepresented under AV, even more so that they were under FPTP. While the Conservatives are underrepresented by over 100 seats in 1997.

One reason that the Jenkins Commission discounted standard AV is for that reason. They argued that it would be totally unnacceptable to have an electoral system that specifically underrepresents one political party, it would give them the Conservatives a systemic disadvantage even more severe than the one they currently face.

By: Jessica Asato

Jessica Asato — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:17:26 +0000

RT @leftfootfwd: Pickles’ selective citation on AV: http://is.gd/89882

By: James Graham

James Graham — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:53:55 +0000

It isn’t just Pickles who has made this mistake; the BBC’s own figures make the same assumption (I note that they’ve now included a barely adequate PDF explaining these figures, together with “an alternate view” based on John Curtice’s figures – I suspect he was the one who complained).

By: Shamik Das

Shamik Das — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:37:25 +0000

Dear Mr @Ericpickles, do you have the slightest idea what you're talking about? RT @leftfootfwd: Pickles’ v odd views AV: http://is.gd/89882