Author Archives: Adrian Pellas-Rice

Opinion: Getting things out of proportion

Finding things to complain about in The Guardian is hardly difficult, but here are two little blemishes that bleed deep:

First we have a quote from editor Alan Rusbridger in 2013, touching on the AV referendum:

They came up with such a weak version of proportional representation that they could not get anyone excited or enthused.

And second, a report from earlier this year on a Guardian staff ballot:

Staff of the Guardian and Observer have voted in favour of Katharine Viner… using the single transferable vote system… he successful candidate is guaranteed a place on the shortlist of three that will go forward to the next round of interviews conducted by the Scott Trust.

Claiming that AV is a form of PR, or that you used STV for what turns out to be a single-winner election, is incongruous at best, and probably just plain wrong. And, of course, the article doesn’t mention that Labour was the party that “came up with” AV as a 2010 election commitment.

If you want to get technical, it is true that AV is essentially STV-1 (STV electing a single member).  But the two names are used distinctly with good reason. STV-1 is a degenerate case, with less complexity and none of the proportionality of its multi-winner siblings. Important connotations of “the single transferable vote system” do not apply to AV, and vice versa. Even if this kind of equivalence was intended, the bold passages still needed qualification in order to make sense to the Guardian’s general readership. It seems far more likely the editorial process just got it wrong.

Posted in News | Tagged , and | 29 Comments

Opinion: Achievable electoral reform for 2015

Securing an initial cross-party agreement is rarely enough to deliver constitutional reform. The dilemma for proponents of proportional voting is that such a fundamental change will always require a lengthy period of consultation. This time is a boon for the backroom operators in the big parties looking to backpedal, backstab, and poison the water. Ask Labour or the Tories for proper voting reform and what you will get is a long-term commitment that is lukewarm and effectively worthless.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged and | 50 Comments
Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarSean Hagan 21st Jan - 8:43pm
    @Andrew Houseley - you make an interesting observation about the challenge posed by decentralisation to “mercantile buccaneering capitalism”. Perhaps this helps to explain the obvious...
  • User AvatarJoseph Bourke 21st Jan - 8:10pm
    David Raw, I seem to recall the Liberal Party under Jeremy Thorpe did rather well in the February 1974 General election, drawing quite a bit...
  • User AvatarPeter Martin 21st Jan - 7:45pm
    @ JoeB, It isn't explained. It's just more assertion. A point that strikes me is that may be that 80% is produced in the private...
  • User AvatarMartin 21st Jan - 7:33pm
    David Raw: Isn't it predictive fingers rather than predictive text? - At least you picked it up. I had the same, sinking heart reaction when...
  • User AvatarDavid Raw 21st Jan - 7:20pm
    The last time there was a February election was, I think, in 1974. As now, the Heath Government was in a pickle and ran on...
  • User AvatarPaul Barker 21st Jan - 6:56pm
    There is no way that we can control the debate in a General Election, it would be the usual confused mess & we & Brexit...