-
Archives
- April 2012
- August 2011
- July 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- August 2010
- July 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- November 2009
- October 2009
- August 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- February 2009
- December 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- January 2008
- September 2007
- July 2007
- February 2007
- June 2006
- January 2006
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
-
Meta
Monthly Archives: February 2011
#No2AV Lie of the Week: Part 6
No to AV are claiming the move to AV would cost the taxpayer £250 million. Their figures break down as follows:
- £82 million for the cost of the referendum itself
- £9 million on voter education
- £130 million on electronic counting machines
- £26 million on further voter education should the referendum pass
Ignoring for a moment (again) how that doesn’t actually add up to £250 million, hopefully you’ve spotted by now that the first £91 million of that won’t actually be saved by voting no. No campaign spokesman Dan Hodges admitted as much to Next Left. It also doesn’t take account of the £17 million the government says will be saved by holding the referendum on the same day as other elections.
So what about the remaining £156 million No to AV claim actually could be saved? Maybe we should consider that. Oh no, wait. We already did. If you ever meet any No advocates, and they tell you that AV requires costly counting machines, you might like to ask them how the Australians managed in 1918! The Electoral Commission have said that they are looking at modernising the voting system, but the result of the AV referendum has not been a factor in their considerations. In fact, the notorious problems with voting machines in the US relate to first past the post elections.
So the only cost remaining is the somewhat mysterious figure of £26 million on voter education
. The £9 million figure from before the referendum seems to be derived from that quoted in parliament as Electoral Commission expenses. The Electoral Commission provides material explaining the electoral process before every election, so it’s unclear why No 2 AV think it would be an additional charge.
In short, No to AV’s claims are a flat out lie. Even the rabidly traditionalist Daily Telegraph admits it. I sincerely hope the electorate will see through the attempts to confuse, and instead vote on the issue: whether or not AV is an improvement on FPTP. Of course, it might be that No to AV would rather just no bother with elections at all. It would, after all, be cheaper.
Posted in Politics
Tagged Australia, AV, Electoral Reform, Lie of the Week, Lies, No to AV, Politics, Referendum, £250 Million
2 Comments
Just because Nick Clegg said it doesn’t mean it’s true
I’ve covered the myth of the miserable little compromise in detail before but, in short, they’re saying we shouldn’t vote for it because Nick Clegg doesn’t like it? Have they forgotten who Nick Clegg is?
Posted in Politics
Tagged AV, Lie of the Week, Lies, Miserable little compromise, Nick Clegg, No to AV, Politics, Referendum
8 Comments
#No2AV Lie of the Week: Part 4
Another week, another bizarre lie from No to AV. This week, they’re further exposing their incoherent and inconsistent message. After last week’s near-truth, this week’s is highly subjective. It almost feels as though they’re doing this specifically to challenge me. AV
, they claim, is the wrong referendum at the wrong time
.
OK, so, starting with the blindingly obvious, that doesn’t tell us anything at all about which way we should vote.
Posted in Politics
Tagged AMS, AV, Electoral Reform, Lie of the Week, Lies, No to, Politics, Referendum, STV
Leave a comment
28 Days Later
On 8th January, along with many other people, I wrote to my MP asking where he stood on the issue of electoral reform. That was 28 days ago.
The requirement for MPs to be elected with 50% of the vote, introduced as part of the proposed change to AV, would make it easier for the electorate to unseat MPs who don’t listen to them.
Posted in Politics
Tagged AV, Bradford West, Electoral Reform, Letters, Marsha Singh, Politics, Referendum
Leave a comment