The vote yes campaigns attempts to convince us all that if AV is given the green light then all MPs are going to work harder to maintain their seats. What evidence is there for this assumption? NONE WHATSOEVER. It is just wishful thinking and some bit of rhetoric that fills the blank spaces.
An alternative way to keep MPs on their toes and provide a better service for their constituents is to have a system of RECALL implemented to which each and every MP is subject.
Politics is supposed to be about debate, arguments for and against. What we have now with this Coalition is what we may get under AV on a permanent basis with very little debate because two parties are tied together in another Coalition and there is no effective opposition. This then becomes the Dictatorship of the Coalition as we have at present.

Do i want an Alternative Vote that will be awarded to someone other than my first choice, that enables them or a.n. other gaining the seat ? NO.

I guess feminists haven't grasped the Vonnegutian truth of the concept that when you call yourself something and act like it long enough, people eventually treat you the way you act and call yourself.

I thought words ("slut" included) belong to all of us, not just the people they refer to, and we all get to decide on the meaning.

This is a really disappointing post. At the end of the day, are you a liberal or a radical? If you're a liberal, then it's fair enough to see electoral reform as a valid political goal, but if you've actually learnt anything from all that Debord, Goldman, Fanon and Invisible Committee you were recommending, I really can't see why you'd see any value on helping to give the same old system of unaccountable hierarchical power a shiny new paint job. Don't vote yes, don't vote no, do something worthwhile instead.

To Erik Pan, it is still the case that under AV, the winning party could have a minority of first preference votes - which is what AV backers condemn FPTP for doing.
The Yes to AV site says, “The principle behind AV is just as simple. An election winner should need the support of a majority of the people.”
But this won’t happen under AV. As the independent Electoral Commission pointed out in its booklet ‘Local elections and referendum’, “an election can be won under the ‘alternative vote’ system with less than half the total votes cast.” (page 8).
Further, all Labour voters should note that voting No will destabilise this Coalition government.
When we reject AV, the LibDems will see that they have gained absolutely nothing from selling themselves to the Conservatives. Some LibDems will not want to prolong the agony of being the loathed government's human shield; some LibDems will cling to the government even more tightly, to try to delay their electoral annihilation.
The LibDems will disintegrate and so will the Coalition.

A braver referendum would allow us to vote in our homes on all issues using an X-Factor button and do away with a swathe of MPs - but that isn't the point. This referendum is about pretending the people play a part in a democracy whilst politicians line their pockets. http://www.webhostingplay.com/

I agree with every word Willp says but all the parties know this vote on AV is an absolute irrelevance, because we are not compelled to choose a second, third or fourth etc on the ballot paper,we can pick the one we want, one tick and that's it, and leave the rest blank, but i did a survey of 100 people in our area and only 23 new they could do this, but here's the most shocking part, 67 thought they Had to pick a second runner,16 thought they Had to pick all the runners in order of preference and 4 were not interested,
so it might be a good idea to let the public be a tad more informed how it all works if the yes vote wins the day. At the moment all this back bitting between the Cons. and the Lib/Dems. is i think, all a smoke screen to stop Clegg & co going into total melt down on May 5th,and if the smoke screen works, they'll be both dancing to the same old tune until the next election. Call me a sceptic but i do smell a rat here,because all the arguments do nothing to reduce the deficit,moves the debate away from the crap job the government is doing with the cuts, ( and the worst is yet to come) because the debt has risen since last May, and will continue to rise as more people are made redundant, which means less revenue. So there you have it folks, it's all a con to take our minds of the real issues on voting day, and finally if i may remind everyone that before the last election in the T V debates Mr.Clegg shot down every single thing his now best pal Dave said and agreed with nearly everything the late lamented Mr Brown
said. I leave you to think on that, and then make your mind up on voting day.

All Scots will mark the British referendum paper with INDEPENDENCE

@ Erik Pan

When you complain that Willp is "still thinking about it like it's first past the post", you rather prove my point that AV requires an active remodeling of political subjectivity FOR WHICH THERE WILL BE NO MANDATE even with a referendum (given that said referendum relies on the current model of subjectivity in which the subject is not divided as to her voting intentions).

Lib Dems were sold a pig in a poke. They demanded a referendum on PR. They were offered a referendum to replace FPTP - a voting system many support and many oppose - with AV - a system nobody supports. They accepted and in return they placed their heads on the block to take the flack for Tory austerity (although to be fair the likes of Clegg and Cable are firmly wedded to the class war agenda this Government is pursuing). I am firmly no to FPTP. However, I am firmly no to AV too. In allowing their leaders to stitch them up like kippers the Lib Dems stitched up all other pro-PR supporters too.

fM - George Osborne says if the AV referendum returns a "No" result, there'll be no further debate on the subject of electoral reform. If it returns a "Yes" it will at best delay PR, at worst we're stuck with AV. But even though AV's not proportional, it's still better than FPTP. Not by much but it's a step.

Anybody who see's themselves as progressive should vote YES2AV for all of the reasons that Laurie Penny outlines, with the additional one that it would be a massive blow for the conservatives, who after all are the real threat to the well being of the young, the vulnerable and the poor

"Ironically, it is precisely this sort of situation - Westminster elites and vested interests carping and bitching at each other ... - that AV is supposed to challenge."
No, I don't think so. AV would maintain the 3-party Westminster elite, and I think that is why it is the option that we are being given, even though, as you say: "The Alternative Vote is nobody's first preference."

The Scottish parliament has something closer to true proportional representation. It works well for me: there is a local (list) MSP who represents my views, something that I don't get with first part the post, and wouldn't get with AV. So why should I vote for anything less than this for Westminster?

Am so angry at LibDems - their mercurial, politics-free agenda for "power at any cost" has made them look both slimey & amorally self-serving, as well as totally idiotic:
-THEY are the ones who joined this "coalition"
-THEY are responsible for the Tories being in power right now
-and bafflingly, they seem to find triumph in this preposterous position of impotence.

HOWEVER i guess a NO vote would give a fillip to the REAL power-holders (and their lying millionaire representatives in the cabinet)
...so as usual, much as it frustrates me to be given such an irritating diversion at this time, i guess i will make myself do the only thing and put the X in the YES box. Damn.

Nothing that Nick Clegg has done either as an MP or as Cameron's image-accessory evidentially let alone ethically far less universally accountably should persuade voters to realistically accept that he is telling the truth on his latest farce! But then there is nothing that his current Party, the Lib Dems, has done as a whole in the House of Commons to show that they constitute a coherent, necessary, ethically sound and accountable constitutional pogramme to make society better and enable justice, fairness and safety for ordinary people in their communities and on their estates to come into being through the Lib Dems’ governance. This is true centrally as it is locally. Say NO to Nick Clegg and vote out the tricksters of CONDEM. Start the movement for a just, democratic and accountable society in Britain. Stop the MPs, the peers’ and the CONDEMs’ role as stooges of Big Business Military Industrial Complex and their irresponsible, wasteful indulgences in warmongering. Hold the colluding MPs to account by democratically, constitutionally and sustainably sacking them at the earliest opportunities. Start the movement of local, regional and uk wide democracy and accountability by publicly asking the elected post holders questions about what the people need and in what particulars the elected ones are failing to deliver on all the needs and on all their pre-poll pledges, promises and ‘assurances’.

I was originally planning on abstaining as a protest, and hope that with a low enough turnout, the government would be pressured into offering a better choice.

Any chances of true electoral reform were ended the minute AV was decided as the alternative. We need real PR in the form of STV or Regional Open List.

However, the downright pathetic 'No' campaign has persuaded me to vote (particularly the letter I got from my Conservative MP). I thought they'd be able to do better but turns out there aren't any good arguments to defend FPTP (who knew?).

The debate has just confused the issue. Forget what you know about AV. The only people av doesn't benefit are the political clasIses. http://bit.ly/kvmrpq

If you think AV represents even a single tiny step towards PR, please read this:

http://wosblog.podgamer.com/2011/05/05/if-you-think-av-will-lead-to-pr-p...

Marcus - John Reid this morning was, according to my Australian friend Robin, lying about Australia & AV.
http://s.coop/14x3
His answer about compulsory voting:
http://s.coop/14x5

I am still NOT voting.

This referendum is about snouts and troughs. Do we maintain the status quo or do we allow Nick Clegg to join it?

By voting you are giving politicians much needed oxygen. The outcome will change nothing, apart from which snouts remain in the trough the longest.

This referendum wad about politicians. How selfish is THAT.

A braver referendum would allow us to vote in our homes on all issues using an X-Factor button and do away with a swathe of MPs - but that isn't the point. This referendum is about pretending the people play a part in a democracy whilst politicians line their pockets.

Meanwhile Brussels merrily runs the country unaffected by the outcome......

Anyone who wants PR or any other voting system needs to vote yes for AV.

If they don't they are playing right into Tory and Labour hands. We all know they don't want voting reform, and we all know why. The minute a No vote is returned, the line will be: 'There is clearly no public desire for voting reform.' The discussion will be over and the public lose again.

"if a no vote is returned, there is a greater chance of there being another debate on electoral reform than if there is a yes."

That seems incredibly counter-intuitive to me. Our political system has so much inertia - any vote for any change is a vote for not keeping things the same forever and ever.

That's funny. You object to a No poster showing a newborn baby (it wasn't a dying baby), but you have no problem with the Yes poster saying that voting No is voting with the BNP.

As every fool knows, the BNP oppose AV because they think it will mean the chances of getting PR (it's dream ticket - as it is for most Yes supporters) will be dead for a generation.

Haven't heard a single argument for or against AV that uses explanation or fact, just all wild rhetoric and platitudes. Politicians, I shit em

We#re screwed both ways. If it's a Yes, then politicians will point to having done all the reform they need to for the next 10 years and progress towards actual Proportional Representation will stop dead. If it's a No, they'll say it demonstrates that people don't want PR.

The only way we could have won is if we demand - constantly and unflinchingly - a system of actual PR. Clegg has ensured that won't happen.

Mind you, even if we had it, which centre-right party would we all hurry to vote for?

I think that in this case one crumb is better than no crumb at all when deciding our vote on AV. Unions and some Labour politicians asking for a 'No' vote? Nick Clegg seen as a liability for the 'Yes' Campaign? Here is something to consider:

Conservative and Progressive are not just political philosophies, they are psychological types as surely as are Extrovert and Introvert. Beyond this there is mental Conservatism and Emotional Conservatism. You can be a Labour voter politically AND have a Conservative nature which makes your political choices somewhat erratic.

Until we can train ourselves to recognise a Conservative at a hundred paces we cannot hope to understand the choices some union leaders and politicians make.

Why do the voters dislike Nick Clegg? Well, according to Wikipedia, Nick Clegg, before he joined the Lib Dems, was Leon Brittan's 'prodigy' when the latter was European Commissioner. Nuff said?

Had the Lib part of the Lib Dems taken the trouble to read a copy of Aesop's fables(i) they would never have joined forces with the SDP and would perhaps have avoided the negative consequences of political impatience.

Vote 'Yes' if you want to change the voting system or you may not get a second chance.

(i) the old woman and the snake!