Friday, March 04, 2011

Claim that a Yes vote in the AV referendum will waste £250m is incorrect

No comments:
Excellent letter from Chris Millman in yesterdays Post about the AV referendum. The man deserves to be elected! Here's what he said...

J ACK Lopresti's claim that a Yes vote in the Alternative Vote referendum will waste £250m does not bear scrutiny.

Of this figure, £90m is for the cost of the referendum, which was sanctioned by his government, and will be spent regardless of the result.

He goes on to claim that much of the rest will be required for the purchase of vote counting machines.
How so?

They use AV in Austrailian elections where turn out is 100% (voting is compulsory over there) yet find that they are able to count the votes manually. Why should it be different here?

The No Campaign estimates these machines will cost £125m when the actual cost will be nil. The remainder of the £250m figure that they have plucked out of the sky is to cover the cost of educating the public in how to use the Alternative Vote.

Why should this be necessary? It is a perfectly simple matter to list the candidates 1,2,3, in order of preference and if you do not feel inclined to do so, a simple X will suffice to indicate that this is the only candidate acceptable to you. No doubt the Government will spend some money encouraging people to vote, as they always do, but a voter turning up at polling station without any knowledge of AV whatsoever would still be able to cast their vote in the old fashioned way.

Mr Lopresti's other claim, that AV allows supporters of fringe parties to have more than one vote, is equally ridiculous.

The system of listing candidates in preferential order allows an 'instant run off'' to take place, so that, effectively, there can be further rounds of voting without the voter having to return to the polling station. Yes, the votes of eliminated candidates are redistributed according to the voters preference, but the votes of those whose choices have not been eliminated will also count in each 'round.'

Mr. Lopresti's contention that AV will benefit the Lib Dems is less easy to debunk, because nobody knows how people will behave when free of the temptation to vote tactically.

I think it is more likely that UKIP will be the party to profit, as there are a great many Euro-sceptics who are unhappy with the Conservative party, but keep voting for them for fear of letting Labour in. I suspect that this is the real reason that Mr Lopresti is so frightened of AV.

Chris Millman, Coombe Dingle

TALKS to end the dispute over the stadium site at Ashton Vale being turned into a town green have broken down.

No comments:
Not a very enticing offer if this is all that it amounts to, so no surprise talks have broken down, for the moment at least.

He said: "We felt we had tabled a very good offer but for obvious reasons, I cannot discuss the details.

"As far as we are concerned, the meditation process is still on-going and we want to continue with the talks."

The Evening Post understands that part of the offer was to allow the open land to the south of the stadium site and the wetlands to be registered as a town green.

This would still allow the 19 acres that would be needed to build the new stadium on the landfill site to be developed.

TALKS to end the dispute over the stadium site at Ashton Vale being turned into a town green have broken down.