“Control orders” could be called “secret detention directives”. “Tax exiles” could be called “tax fugitives”. “Extraordinary rendition” could be called “government-sponsored kidnapping”.
In all three cases a fairly benign phrase has been adopted by both sides of the debate, despite the phrase very much favouring one. Having a bit of order doesn’t instinctively sound too bad. Exile even has a whiff of the honourably martyr about it. And “extraordinary”? Well, that’s usually a good thing, isn’t it? Especially if we’re talking about “rendition”, i.e. a word that is well outside common usage.
Does it matter? Not if an issue is at the centre of public attention. But when an issue only gets brief interest from the public, or minimal media coverage that gets little beyond naming the issue and quoting two different politicians disagreeing, then yes it does – as it frames the way in which people judge the issue.
That, of course, is one of the reasons why the Yes campaign for the forthcoming referendum on the alternative vote is Yes To Fairer Votes rather than Yes To An Acronym You’ve Not Heard Of.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Northern Ireland debates the future of its railways in 1957
Church Green video
Thinking of standing for election or re-election next year? Helpful questions to consider
Endometriosis and acetylation
Jeff
Nonconformistradical
John Peters
David Raw
Henry
4 Comments
Yes to Fairer Votes.
So Vote No to AV!
Commenting reminder: Please remember to respect our moderation policy when commenting, including in particular the references to off-topic comments and to personal insults. We have this policy so that people can choose to take part in the discussions which interest them, rather than finding the same discussions shoe-horned into threads on posts on a wide range of other topics. More details are at https://www.libdemvoice.org/comment-policy Thanks.
So, Stephen, are you seriously suggesting that FPTP is faier than AV?
Many here will of course say that there are many fairer systems than AV, especially PR in its various guises. However, FPTP is surely so horrendously unfair that pretty much anything is better, and AV most certainly is.
I’d also say that on a constiutuency level, AV has the potential to making a real difference, as candidates need to reach out to a much larger proportion of voters.
@Maria
“AV has the potential to making a real difference”
Would that be the sameAV that Nick Clegg called “a miserable little compromise” then?