From the Yes to Fairer Votes campaign:
Over the coming months, the nation will be asking: how will you vote on 5 May?
Ralph Hill, 86, knows how he’ll be voting – Yes.
Ralph fought for democracy in World War II – and he wants to make ours better this May.
Watch him explain why:
(Also on YouTube here.)
You can sign up to help the Yes to Fairer Votes campaign on their website.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Alison Suttie writes: Thank you to our volunteers (Alison Suttie)
What’s going on with party strategy? (Caron Lindsay)
We do have a two-tier system (Neil Hickman)
Observations of an Expat: NATO Irony (Tom Arms)
What really happened? (Simon Banks)
Labour deputy claims that Farage is a threat to democracy
Knaptoft: The very heart of England
Remembering Liz Truss and her dogs that barked at drones
We do have a two-tier policing system but it is not what our homegrown racists think it is.
Lib Dems are reviewing policy and strategy says PoliticsHome
From Norman settlement to a civic square
Jason Connor 
Cllr Fran OborskiMBE 
Tom Arms Tom Arms 
Ruth Bright 
21 Comments
Amazing video, really powerful. I’m voting yes because I want my vote to count and my MP to be forced to reach out to more people in my constituency… but now I’m also voting yes for Ralph!!
I’m voting ‘no’ because AV is too worthless for me to really care either way, but I don’t want to pass up an opportunity to damage Nick Clegg.
@iainm – By voting in a way that pleases Cameron and rightwing Tories and against the wishes of the Labour leader, who was elected using AV. Well done!
How does AV help me if I live in a Lib Dem/Tory marginal and want to vote for a change of government ?
So you think I should vote ‘yes’ just to spite Cameron?
Anthony, it’s a Tory-Lib Dem marginal under FPTP, you don’t know what it is under AV – it might be Labour/Green/whatever.
Too bad for Ralph the Lib Dems have scuppered electoral reform.
“Anthony, it’s a Tory-Lib Dem marginal under FPTP, you don’t know what it is under AV – it might be Labour/Green/whatever.”
Thanks, but I wasn’t born yesterday!
A beautiful video. The votes of millions of people who live in safe seats count for nothing under FPTP. AV will mean MPs in safe seats will have to work much harder to keep their seats..
STV would be even better, and hopefully it’ll be an option some year, but as AV is the only option for now, we should support it.
Bad new Ralph. The chances are your vote won’t count under AV either.
“AV will mean MPs in safe seats will have to work much harder to keep their seats..”
I wish someone would explain the basis of claims such as this.
As far as I can see, once the second preferences have been reallocated, there will be more or less the same number of “safe seats” as there are now, and MPs will have no incentive to work harder by one iota.
AV will make seats safer by convincing people they can punish politicians by giving their first preference to various threatening fringe parties, but their second preference to the same old politicians.
Sorry that should be *nonthreatening.
“iainm”
What a pathetic reason for voting ‘no’!
“Anthony Aloysius St”
What a very short term coalition-based question about a long term change!
On the question of less safe seats, in the 1970s Newbury had been a safe Conservative seat, albeit with a large post war Labour vote , since 1924. In the 1970 General Election the Liberal Party in Newbury got 21% of the vote when the national average was about 7.5%.
In February and October 1974 we twice got 40 % of the vote when the national average was about 19% and 18 % respectively. The results in 1974 were, roughly, Conservative 24,000, Liberal 23,000 and Labour 10,000. With AV, Newbury would have become a Liberal seat in 1974, rather than having to wait for another 19 years. That is surely worth something democratically.
AV is not any fairer than FPTP,all this is about is getting more lib dem mp’s at westminster,this is not a crusade to make the voting system fairer if it was we would be offered proper pr not this “miserable little compromise”,its just lib dem’s looking after themselves,how does this help people who support smaller parties,this will not increase their representation,their votes will still count for nothing.
Dane Clouston
like it or not but people do want to punish lib dems for their lies last may and for helping the right wing nutters theyre propping up to attack the poor,disabled and any body else who hasn’t got a voice and makes an easy scapegoat.
Why would people want give the tories power for a generation,fracis maude is already speaking about a tory/lib dem right wing coalition past the next election,why would people who are opposed to the tories want to hand them permanent power on a plate.
Call me a troll if you like but i have voted lib dem since ’97,i will still vote for my local lib dem councillor as she does a good job and doesn’t deserve losing her seat just because the mp’s have sold out,sadly i think many good lib dem councillors will be voted out through things that are beyond their control.
Having been involved with the Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform and Compass for some time (who both support AV with the Fabian, I am led to believe), I am disappointed that so many people are prepared to be so short-sighted. There are many different attempts to project how this will affect parties but given that people don’t have to select more than one candidate the projections are best guess. It is saddening that so many are prepared to side with the right wing of the Tory party, and ignore the principle that MPs are going to have to get 50% of the vote, so they are going to need to work harder and listen more to their constituents. I suspect this will not help Lib Dem MPs after their recent behaviour and will be good for supporters of smaller parties who want to see policies adopted by the mainstream parties.
“mf”
You say “AV is not any fairer than FPTP, all this is about is getting more libdem MPs at Westminster. This is a not a crusade to make the voting system fairer. If it was we should be offered proper pr not this “miserable little compromise”.
It all depends what you mean by fairer, and for whom.
It is for voters rather than for political activists that AV is fairer than FPTP. It will mean that we can vote for our first preference and still make a difference between the eventual two front runners. And even in a safe seat we can vote for our first preference and still support the runner up, without having to think about tactical voting.
The thought of having to vote X again instead of 1,2,3 makes me sick at heart. And I don’t want “proper PR” for Westminster, since I like having an MP whom I can identify and can go and see if I want, even if he is in the wrong party from my point of view.
I wouldn’t dream of calling you a troll! Personally I voted Labour for the first time in my life – in our safe Conservative consituency – because they had offered the LibDems a referendum on AV. So, up till now, I have got what I want, although not the coalition I wanted. I don’t vote LibDem for Westminster these days because they would take us into the Euro and even further into the EU, turning our country into a collection of regions in a bureaucratic country/empire called Europe. I am an EU-sceptic Liberal. But I do think that, given the result of the election, the LibDems did the right thing in forming a stable government with the Tories. It is now hard for them having to compromise with the Tories. And they can’t help their EU and Euro enthusiasm, they are stuck with it, unfortunately, and it will be their downfall.
“JohnD”
How I agree with you about people being so short sighted – and often petty – in their declared motivations towards voting No.
Dane Clouston
Thanks for your reply.
Its a matter of opinion and i dont think we are going to agree with each others view,What i will say is nick clegg in may did not think it was an improvement,Well thats what he told the electarate,What he realy believes we will probaly find out sooner enough.I just dont see AV as fairer,It can be used as a stitch up as planned by francis maude to gaurentee a permanent right wing coalition,It doesnt help smaller parties votes count and the only beneficiaries i can see are the lib dems wich leads me to believe they want this for selfish reasons and not some great moral battle for people like ralph,If it was AV+ i would still be sceptical but i could see more merit in this,Personaly if it was proper pr then i would have no problem voting yes and campaigning for it.
“mf”
I don’t think that you have taken on board my point that it is for voters that AV is fairer, rather than for political activists and parties.
I am amazed that you cannot see that if the only alternative on offer is AV, it is worth voting for instead of against. Electoral reform at Westminster has been delayed for far too many years by electoral reformers making the best the enemy of the good, and it sounds as though you would recommend people going on doing just that. I will think of you, so may your ears burn if you have voted No, if I have to vote X ever again – instead of 1.2.3 – in the next General Election!
Dane Clouston
Its your opinion that its fairer,In my opinion it is not,FPTP is not a good system and i believe AV is equally as bad,AV is being used as a sop to take proper reform of the agenda for a generation,i am a supporter of electoral reform but this no improvement so i will abstain from voting.i have taken your opinion on board about being fairer on voters but i disagree,if i voted for 3 smaller parties 1,2,3 i will have the same chance of these parties getting elected as i would with just an X,my vote would still be worthless as i may not wish to rank the parties i disagree with,the only way every vote counts is with proper PR.Nick clegg called this “a miserable little compromise” in may yet 6 months later its the great reform we have all been waiting for.I do not recommend voting either way to anyone its for each individual to listen to the arguments and decide for themselves which way to vote.
mf, why do you think Francis Maude, who doesn’t want AV, is claiming that it will lead to a permanent Tory government (either alone or in coalition)? He knows that this won’t get Tories to vote for AV, but it might scare a few people into voting against it…
It’s another trick like Norman Tebbit claiming he’s happy with the coalition, a right-wing Tory trying to scare people into opposing something on the grounds that somebody they don’t like claims to support it.