A Voting System is for Voters, not Parties!

So my attention was drawn to another No to AV article today. This one written by somebody called Max Tappenden on the Appelby Report site. The article's here: http://www.applebyreport.com/2010/11/30/no-to-the-alternative-vote/

It's symptomatic of the FPTP thinking habits that lead to worrying about gains and losses for particular parties out of a voting system and completely misses the point that a voting system should be for voters, and by giving power to them and making MPs work harder, everyone gains ultimately. Two quotes that I've included here jumped out at me as particularly unsavoury and I just had to respond to them. Below is what I wrote as a comment on the article.

It's difficult to take seriously anyone who at the same time, both belittles the views of those who don't support a major party as their first choice; and doesn't know when to use 'fewest' insetad of 'least'.

". The afterthoughts of those with unpopular views play a very big role in deciding who represents us in Parliament! "

This is a lie and a rather devious one at that. Deliberately using the word unpopular whose literal meaning is simply 'minority' with the intent to confuse readers with the connotations of being objectionable is bad enough to begin with. Not every minority party is viewed to be objectionable.

Nonetheless, the role of this minority in deciding the election is a lot smaller than the statement suggests. What really happens in such a case, is that the none of the parties with the largest minorities have an overall majority of first choices, so the views of those who voted for the smallest minorities are considered to ensure that of the almost-winners, the one who comes closest to being viewed positively by a majority of voters is the eventual winner.

In a democracy all voters' views should be equally valid, and while small minority party can't get elected in either AV or FPTP, what AV does is allows voters to show their preferences without having to employ second guessing or tactics, and without having to deny their first choice candidate their vote.

"the Conservatives would be the losers under the Alternative Vote, with the Liberal Democrats and Labour as the two biggest beneficiaries. "

This is completely missing the point. It's not about benefits or hindrances to particular parties. Any effect on parties is subject to change over years with policies and leaders, views and circumstances coming and going. What we should be looking at are people. Voters, and politicians.

The biggest beneficiaries of AV are the voters. All voters would be free to vote preferentially and the pressure to vote tactically would be all but eliminated. Wasted votes, split votes, minority safe seats and tactical voting, all problems of FPTP would be vastly reduced. The biggest losers would be those MPs who are either unable, unwilling, or unaware that they're required to work hard for the constituents, and ensure that they are meeting the needs of as many of them as they can. The ones who will lose out are the ones who's entire gameplan has been up 'til now to keep their core minority of voters happy knowing that FPTP will ensure that that's all they ever need do, with no need to pay attention to up to 70% of their constituents.

Now it might be that a lot of those MPs currently standing to lose from a fairer system are Conservative. Shame on them if so, but that needn't remain the case. For all we know the Conservatives could be the ones working the hardest under AV and doing the best for their constituents in future. With the right voting system giving power to the voters and making MPs work harder everyone wins ultimately regardless of party allegiance.

Looking at things as they are now and assuming that they will remain the same forever is not at all helpful. Nor is analysing a voting system based on which parties benefit or lose out. The key issue is making sure the voters have their say, that they get to express their full view. FPTP assumes that given a number of options everyone can pick one thing that they like and that they dislike everything else, and to an equal extent. That is simply not true. There's so much more to an individual voter's view than an FPTP ballot allows them to say. AV allows them to express their views much better and that is why AV benefits the voters any any party who can adapt to delivering what the voters need will benefit from AV too. Any that can't break the habits of laziness afforded them by FPTP will lose out, regardless of party name, colours or political views.