tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4732407426313451205.post5085944285378570779..comments2024-03-08T15:43:20.236+00:00Comments on Keynesian Liberal: To PR or not to PR...Peter Wrigleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16481117156930677255noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4732407426313451205.post-73805702034954176852010-07-01T18:04:46.622+01:002010-07-01T18:04:46.622+01:00You are right, there is a great danger of an arcan...You are right, there is a great danger of an arcane debate if we try to increase the options. I've mentioned before that, given the chance, we PR enthusiasts are likely to give too much information and launch off into debates on such issues as the relative merits of the different quotas. Indeed there was such a debate at he AGM last week on the "Newland and Britton" versus the "Meek" method of counting! However, I do believe that if we exercise restraint we should be able to clarify rather than fudge the issues. The opportunity to put the case for real PR is too good to lose.Peter Wrigleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481117156930677255noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4732407426313451205.post-17589631385691637982010-06-28T12:50:38.220+01:002010-06-28T12:50:38.220+01:00That seems the right line for the Electoral Reform...That seems the right line for the Electoral Reform Society to take as a campaigning organization for proportional representation. However I see a high risk in your two-part referendum question. First it will lead to an arcane debate on the merits of AV vs STV: a great switch-off for most voters. Secondly even if STV 'wins', it is likely to do so with a minority of those who vote and even smaller minority of the electorate. Opponents will claim that the majority voted against STV so there is no mandate. FPTP vs AV would focus the debate on the absurdities of FPTP and the beneficial effects (even if far short of PR) of AV.Jaimehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16106307451408203689noreply@blogger.com