For the last 15 months, Ryan Gallagher has here been chronicling the debate around the Alternative Vote (AV) referendum for OurKingdom.
Throughout this period there has been strong argument, controversies and bickering. At times the coalition government's relationship has appeared fragile as a result of differences on AV. Lib Dems accused the No campaign, which is heavily funded by Tories, of lying. While Tories, including prime minister David Cameron, refuted the claims, branding AV as "undemocratic".
Polls showing the level of support for both Yes and No camps have lacked any consistency. The Yes campaign enjoyed a substantial early lead, however gradually their support has waned. In recent weeks there has been a surge in support for a No vote, and two of the most recent polls put the No2AV campaign in a huge lead.
The outcome still remains uncertain. But whatever the result, when the polls close on the 5th May, it is clear that the AV referendum will have changed British politics for better or for worse – depending upon which side of the fence you are sitting.
With less than 24 hours until the ballot boxes open, both Yes and No sides both claim to believe they will win. It is now up to the voter to decide.
If you have not yet made up your mind, help inform your judgement by reliving the months of debate below....
May
There is more infighting in the coalition government over AV. Prime minister David Cameron distances himself from the official No2AV campaign, amid criticism of its campaign strategy. Deputy prime minister Nick Clegg and David Cameron vow not to let their differences damage the government. The final Yes to AV rally is held in London.
The final Yes to AV rally is held in London, featuring the comedian Eddie Izzard. "We may not get another opportunity like this in our lifetime," Izzard tells an audience of over 400 at the event, held at the Royal Institution of Great Britain.
Intelligence Squared host a debate on AV, featuring ourKingdom editor Anthony Barnett.
Infighting within the coalition government escalates amid a cabinet confrontation between Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat energy secretary, and prime minister David Cameron, reports the FT.
Support for AV falls. Prime minister David Cameron describes AV as "undemocratic". New Statesman magazine endorses AV. Cracks begin to appear in the coalition government over AV disagreement.
AV's not perfect, but we need it for plurality, argues Hilary Wainwright at the Guardian.
Lib Dem president Tim Farron causes controversy at a Yes to AV event, describing Thatcherism as "organised wickedness".
London election chiefs issue referendum advice. Barry Quirk, the London Regional Counting Officer, said: “We want to make sure every Londoner who wants to have their say in this referendum, can.
AV would not bring radical change, but it would empower the voter - argues Glenn Gottfried, research fellow at the Institute for Public Policy Research.
Prime minister David Cameron says AV is "undemocratic".
Former Labour business secretary Peter Mandelson tells Sky News a Yes vote could "destabilise" prime minister David Cameron and "might even cost him his leadership".
Channel Four "fact checks" some of the claims made about AV.
New Statesman endorses AV: "For now, the priority is to deliver a death blow to the unfair, undemocratic and unrepresentative FPTP system. It is for this reason that we encourage progressives of all parties to vote Yes to AV on 5 May."
There is more controversy around campaign strategy, as energy and climate change secretary Chris Huhne claims the NO2AV campaign has told "straightforward lies".5148748184_495bc1a8de.jpg
A Guardian/ICM poll finds that support for AV is "collapsing", with the No campaign at a 16 point advantage.
Prime minister David Cameron says a vote for AV would be a "backward step".
Cracks begin to appear in the coalition government over AV, as former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown accuses Chancellor George Osborne of cheap mudslinging and scaremongering to push the “no” vote through, reports City A.M.
"This is a referendum on the voting system. Not on Nick Clegg," writes Ed Miliband in the Independent.
The Constitution Society publish an AV explainer, including a comparison between AV and First Past the Post.
At a debate organised by the London Evening Standard, the public vote in favour of AV. During the debate, former London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, says: "I want to see a situation where parties fight for every vote. There is nowhere where you can say 'it doesn't matter here', and this is a big step."
No2AV demand that the Electoral Reform Society stop backing the Yes vote in order to protect “the integrity of the British electoral system", reports the Telegraph.
Useful and informative piece from Channel 4 News – Alternative Vote: your questions answered.
March
Businessmen and historians clash over AV. The Daily Mail urges its readers to vote No to AV. Several unions form an unlikely alliance with the Tories by announcing their opposition to AV. There is more speculation on the degree to which the AV campaign, if it was to be successful, would destabilise the coalition government.
The Telegraph's Daniel Knowles tears in to the historians who wrote the anti-AV Times letter. "I cannot believe 26 prominent historians are so stupid," he writes.
Businessmen and historians clash over AV, reports Politics.co.uk. "The cause of reform, so long fought for, cannot afford to have the fundamentally fair and historic principle of majority voting cast aside," the historians argue in a letter to the Times. While the businessmen, writing in the telegraph, write AV would "be good for the country and good for business."
Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander will front the Scottish campaign to change the voting system for Westminster elections, the Scotsman reports.
No to AV's Matthew Elliott tells the BBC "The Alternative Vote system would cost us £250m and install the Lib Dems as permanent kingmakers. Our country can't afford it."
Left Foot Forward dissects Ken Clarke's claim that AV would open the door for extremist parties.
An unnamed senior Tory minister tells the Herald if the Yes to AV campaign wins, it would be "the most destabilising thing for the coalition".
The Independent's Simon Carr writes that a vote for AV will result in "Nick Clegg in every cabinet between now and the end of World War Three," adding: "I can't get enough of him myself but it's a rare taste, as for devilled haemorrhoids."
"The No to AV campaign is preying on fear," argues Nicola Cutcher in a piece for ourKingdom.
A piece on spiked-online.com argues against AV. "Moving towards an AV system would make British politics even less democratic and open than it is," writes the website's editor, Brendan O’Neil.
The Daily Mail describes AV as a "threat to democracy" and vows to "campaign passionately" against it. London Mayor Boris Johnson comes out against AV. A controversial No2AV ad causes a stir across the internet, as the Yes campaign is accused of breaking the rules on 'cold calling'. The Yes campaign surges to a ten point lead, according to one poll.A Yes campaigner is embroiled in a 'race row', after tweeting an allegedly islamaphobic remark.Foreign Secretary William Hague calls on the No campaign to reveal its financial donors, after the campaign publicly refuses to do so.
"The coalition is interested in electoral gerrymandering, not real voting reform," argues Labour MP Austin Mitchell.no-to-av-baby-campaign-005.jpg
A controversial No2AV ad causes a storm across the internet. The ad, which features a new born baby alongside the words "She needs a new maternity unit not an alternative voting system", is later described by New Statesman blogger Steven Baxter as "infantile". Liberal Conspiracy editor Sunny Hundal also files a complaint about the ad to the Advertising Standards Authority. "What shocks me isn't that there is a campaign against AV, but the extremely dishonest manner in which campaigners are trying to make their case," he writes.
Former Tory MP Neil Hamilton proclaims his support for AV in a piece for the Daily Express. "For once, we will have a vote which matters," he writes. "We can put the old gang of party leaders on notice that the era of The People vs The Politicians is over."
The No campaign describes AV as "costly and complex", a claim Yes campaigners promptly rebuff, calling their opponents "desperate" and "short of arguments".
The Independent newspaper urges its readers to vote Yes to AV. A "marathon" two-week debate on the AV referendum in House of Lords gets underway.Labour leader Ed Miliband pledges to be a "vocal supporter" of AV.
The Lords AV referendum debate nears its climax, after a mammoth 14 days of debate.
"The coalition would benefit from a Yes in the referendum on the Alternative Vote," writes Vernon Bogdanor over at the New Statesman. "AV would allow co-operation at constituency level without withdrawal of candidates."
A "marathon debate" on AV gets underway in the Lords, but is adjourned amid rumours of a behind the scenes compromise between Labour and the coalition.
The Yes to AV campaign gathers momentum, with an exclusive poll in the Independent on Sunday showing “almost two-thirds of people [are] amenable to ditching first past the post”.
Conservatives act to stop Labour peers derailing voting referendum bill, reports the Guardian.
Yet more controversy surrounding the date of the AV referendum arises, as the BBC reveal the vote could be postponed because Labour peers are holding up the bill which would enable it to happen.
Ed Miliband pledges to be a "vocal supporter" of AV, though says his priority is winning the Welsh and Scottish elections – taking place on the same day as the AV referendum – in May.
The Independent newspaper asks its readers to vote Yes to AV. "We are urging people to vote Yes in four months' time on the merits of the case," they write, "because AV would be a valuable democratic improvement on the existing system."
"I would urge all Labour MPs to support AV," writes Luke Akehurst over at ProgessOnline, "but particularly those in the 114 ‘No' signatories who consider themselves modernisers need to ask themselves why they are not calling for the modernisation of our democracy."
Labour leader Ed Miliband adopts a pro AV stance, reportedly defying Labour 'grandees' in the process. The House of Lords vote to allow flexibility on the referendum date.
A Guardian/ICM poll puts the Yes camp ahead of the No by six points, 44% to 38%.
Yes to AV campaigners reveal they do not want the support of Nick Clegg, for fear that his current unpopularity may drag the campaign down. "Our aim is to keep politicians out of the campaign," a senior Yes to AV campaigner tells the Guardian, "but the single politician we would like to stay out is Nick Clegg."
Votes on the AV referendum will not be counted until the next day, reports the BBC
Labour MP Andy Burnham tells the Guardian he believes there are more important issues than AV, and confirms he has not yet made up his mind which way to vote. He also criticises the date of the referendum, which is set to take place on the same day as local elections in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. "The Lib Dems have done them a huge disservice by accepting the referendum on the same day as elections in England, Scotland and Wales," he says.
77 Labour MPs and supporters declare their support for AV in a letter printed in the Guardian. "First past the post isn't working," they say. "It's time for change."
"The biggest problem for the pro-AV campaign is that even its own supporters aren't keen on the system," writes George Eaton at the New Statesman. "If the Yes camp is to stand a chance of winning the referendum, it will need to overcome public apathy."
The Electoral Commission intends to distribute a booklet to households explaining both FPTP and AV, reports LibDemVoice.
"Yes to AV, no to PR," argues Samuel Walker at ProgressOnline. "AV expands voters' capacity to hold their representatives to account while PR places totally unacceptable limits on political accountability that should be anathema to any true democrat," he says.
November
The British National Party (BNP) announce their opposition to AV, as do five former cabinett ministers, including David Blunkett and Margarett Beckett There is criticism of the referendum's date from the House of Lords constitution committee. The Yes to AV campaign gets its website up and running.
Former Liverpool MP Jane Kennedy is to lead Labour's campaign against AV, reports the Liverpool Echo.5631122647_3c69470141_b.jpg
Lord Reid makes a case against AV in a piece in the Telegraph. AV is "obscure, unfair and expensive," he argues.
The BNP announce their opposition to AV. "The AV system ... is actually even a greater distortion of the democratic process than the current first-past-the-post (FPTP) system," they say in a statement on their website.
Simon Hix, professor in the Department of Government at the London School of Economics and Political Science, "lambasts AV" in a Constitution Society interview. “AV is a bad system," he says.
Five former Labour Cabinet Ministers – Margaret Beckett, David Blunkett, Lord Falconer, Lord Reid and Lord Prescott – announce they will campaign against AV. "This is so important it has to rise above party politics," says Beckett. "AV does not help democracy. It stands in its way."
The announcement of Prince William and Kate Middleton's wedding date [29 April 2011] sparks concerns it will overshadow referendum, reports the Financial Times [subscription].
The Coalition urges peers not to fall for Labour "trap" on AV vote, writes Nicholas Cecil of the Evening Standard.
More criticism on the date of the referendum comes from the House of Lords Constitution Committee. It was "regrettable" the Scottish government was not consulted over the date, the Herald reports.
"The coalition agreement's commitment to an £80m-plus referendum on the alternative vote (AV) has attracted most publicity," writes the Guardian's Michael White, "but more trouble may yet be caused by sweeping changes to constituency boundaries.
The Tories could be having second thoughts on AV, writes Stuart Weir in a post on ourKingdom. "Intelligent Tories are just catching up on the advantages for them and their coalition partners of the alternative vote, just as the referendum has won approval in Parliament", he says.
Support for the AV vote has plummeted, writes George Eaton over at the New Statesman.
October
David Cameron urges fellow Tories not to try to "wreck the [referendum] Bill". The No2AV campaign launches its website.
The Times report that Tory 'no' campaigners have heeded David Cameron's call not to "wreck the bill" by making a tactical change. The rebels, according to the report, will "lift their threat to the date of next year's proposed referendum on voting changes – because they believe May 5 offers the best chance of stopping the alternative vote (AV) system."
David Cameron reiterates a similar sentiment to Hague in his own speech to the Conservative Party Conference. "I don’t want to change our voting system any more than you do," he says, "but let’s not waste time trying to wreck the bill – let’s just get out there and win the vote."
Speaking at the Conservative Party conference, Foreign Secretary William Hague warns Tory rebels that they must retain their commitment to an AV referendum. "The Lib Dems have honoured their word and we will honour ours," he says. "Let us be clear that we will hold the referendum and hold it on schedule."
The No2AV campaign gets its website up and running, while No2AV chairman, Lord Leach, publishes an open letter asking for help with the campaign.
A study by leading academics finds that, had the 2010 general election been conducted under AV, the Liberal Democrats would have had a wider choice of post-election coalition partners than it experienced under First Past The Post (FPTP).
Blogger 'Archbishop Cramner' says Ed Miliband's victory in the leadership contest is a "damning indictment of AV."
Billy Bragg, Fiona MacTaggart MP and Billy Hayes of the CWU are among the speakers at a Take Back Parliament rally in Manchester. Prior to the rally, Bragg says Ed Miliband must be "brave and bold" on voting reform.
After narrowly defeating his brother David in the race for Labour leadership, Ed Miliband proclaims his support for AV.
Researcher Olaf Corry outlines "four reasons why Conservatives should back PR."
An unofficial "Vote No To AV" Twitter account appears.
Robert Halfon over at conservativehome writes advocating the 'Second Ballot' system as opposed to AV, arguing that "the beauty of TSB is both its fairness, and simplicity."
Nick Clegg launches 'Yes to AV' campaign at the Liberal Democrat conference in Liverpool. "I know AV may not be the favourite voting system of everyone here," he says, "but whether you prefer this, AV+, the single transferable vote or any another model, we all agree that AV is infinitely fairer than what we have at the moment."
The compromise of AV is itself being compromised, warns Anthony Barnett in a post on ourKingdom. "The way it is being legislated stinks of the old regime", he argues.
"Who is for AV on its own merits?", asks James Forsyth over at The Spectator.
The AV referendum can be seen as "classic Cameron-Clegg ‘modernisation’ – looking both ways at the same time", writes Gerry Hassan.
The conservativehome blog lists ten Tory MPs that voted against the AV referendum during the second reading of the Referendum Bill on 7th September. The blog post also includes key extracts from Tory MPs' contributions to the debate.
What is behind Tory MP Douglas Carswell's decision to submit an amendment that would, if passed, offer voters an STV option in the referendum?, asks ourKingdom's Guy Aitchison.
The Scotsman reports that Dunfermline and West Fife MP Thomas Docherty, is seeking cross-party support for holding the AV referendum on 8th September, 2011. "We've gone for the September date because it's a significant period after the assembly elections so that people can recover from political fatigue", he says.
Labour and Tory rebels unite against AV vote, reports the Independent.
The Green Party’s Caroline Lucas challenges the Milliband brothers to back the inclusion of a PR option in the referendum. “I am tabling an amendment that would rewrite the referendum question to allow people to choose from a wider range of voting systems,” she writes in an article in the New Statesman, “including properly proportional options such as the additional member system”.
Anti-AV campaigners promise an “exciting campaign” in the lead up to the referendum.
Anthony Barnett and Jerome di Costanzo engage in a colourful debate about the merits of AV in a post on openDemocracy. “The FPTP voting system shouldn't be condemned”, says di Costanzo. Barnett disagrees: “FPTP needs to go because it is intrinsically undemocratic.”
August
Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the Taxpayers' Alliance, is appointed to lead the No2AV campaign. The blog Liberal Conspiracy publishes an expose, claiming Tories run the No2AV camapign. Meanwhile singer-songwriter Billy Bragg and deputy prime minister Nick Clegg are among those to pledge their support to the Yes campaign.
AV will prevent radical free-market reforms, argues Sam Collins of the Institute of Economic Affairs. “Changing the voting system may be good for other reasons,” he writes, “but it makes a government that will be willing to enact radical free-market reform less likely.”
The Scottish National Party says the AV referendum could delay the Scottish council elections, which are scheduled on the same day.
AV will deny smaller parties a chance of winning any significant representation just like FPTP, and will create a dynamic towards tactical voting,argues David Rickard. “You know your preferred party can’t win, so you end up voting tactically all the same.”
Ipsos MORI’s Head of Political and Electoral Research, Roger Mortimore, writes in a detailed post on the LSE blog that scrapping first past the post will not put an end to tactical voting. Rather, he says, “new forms of tactical voting could open up under AV.”
Liberal Conspiracy publishes an ‘expose’ on “how Tories run the ‘No-2-AV’ campaign.”
Guy Aitchison reflects on Littlewood’s analysis in a post on openDemocracy: “Some of the strategic political reasons he lists should definitely be a cause for concern for reformers, whereas others, relating to the organisation of the Yes campaign and the arguments for AV are wide of the mark I think."
Director General of the Institute of Economic Affairs,Mark Littlewood, lists ten reasons why the Yes campaign is “staring at defeat.”
John Jackson arguesthat AV “could accelerate the rate at which we move to a multi-party system covering a wide range of political opinion and reduce the number of ‘safe’ seats.”
“Whatever your party, there is now an overwhelming public interest case for adopting the Alternative Vote,”writes Patrick Dunleavyof the LSE.
Singer-songwriter Billy Bragg weighs in on the debate. “Under a fairer voting system, the Tories could be defeated”, he says. “Although AV is not the proportional change that I had hoped for, it does have the potential to re-engage Labour voters disenfranchised by FPTP.”
Anthony Barnett comments that “The 'No' campaign is going to enjoy itself making up reasons to attack AV.”
Peter Facey issues a point by point rebuttal of Jenkin’s argument. “First Past the Post in single member seats has not served the United Kingdom well and certainly not for 300 years, since it only came in for all seats in the House of Commons in 1950,” he says. “I fear that Bernard Jenkin’s article is an indication from the ‘No’ camp that instead we are going to get half truths, smears and a deliberate attempt to confuse the public.”
Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin writes in the Evening Standard that “the AV system of elections is about the most unloved way of electing politicians in the world,” further commenting: “why abandon the system that is tried and tested, where each vote is of equal value, which has done the UK well for about 300 years.”
Andy May of Take Back Parliament writes that there must be a “separate vote on the referendum and boundary changes.” It was a mistake of Nick Clegg to “give in to Tory demands to combine the legislation”, he argues.
Anthony Barnett suggests there are four possible outcomes of the AV referendum and says which he prefers.
July
The AV referendum question is published, and the date is set. The legislation is linked in to controversial boundary changes. The ‘No to AV’ campaign begins to take shape.
Gerry Hassan outlines the political and constitutional issues raised by the UK government’s decision to hold the AV referendum on the same day as the devolved elections. “Voters across the UK would not have an equal experience or be part of the same campaigns,” he argues, “which could distort the result and pose all sorts of problems for the broadcasting media.”
The Scottish Government threatens to derail the AV referendum because its scheduled date clashes with Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish elections. This prompts an editorial in the Scotsman to proclaim “we do not need a referendum on this unloved and unwanted voting system.”
Lord Ashcroft produces research which suggests that the Conservatives "could do as well, and possibly better" under AV.
Charles Moore of The Telegraph writes that “[first past the post] seems fairer and more decisive than any alternative vote.”
The Daily Mail’s Anthony King describes AV as “nothing if not exotic.” Adding: “anyone who claims to know how it would work out in practice in the UK is a false prophet.” Another Mail columnist, Peter Oborne, says AV “enables politicians to break their promises, opening the way to secrecy and deceit.”
Alexandra Runswick, Director of Unlock Democracy, releases a statement in which she says: “This referendum must not be derailed by politicians who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.”
The shadow Welsh Secretary, Peter Hain, comments that Clegg has “allowed himself to be sandbagged by his Tory partners in his otherwise laudable attempt to intro4601556608_3a7b556458_b.jpgduce a fairer electoral system.”
A BBC documentary suggests Nick Clegg “bluffed the Conservative leader, David Cameron, into offering the Lib Dems a referendum on a change to the voting system as part of the coalition talks.”
Co-chairman of the ‘All-Party Parliamentary Group for the promotion of first-past-the-post’ (see this document (pg.198) for more info on this group), Daniel Kawczynski MP, writesthat he believes the problem with AV is that it “allows... two classes of voter, those who will cast one vote and those who will have two or three bites of the cherry.” This, he says, results in an “unfair weighting of votes between those who support and often campaign on behalf of a certain party and those who are happy to vote two or three times.”
John Prescott MP says AV is “cover for the biggest gerrymandering of seats that I have ever seen in my 40 years in politics.”
Blogger Sunny Hundal describes his frustration with “the attitude of many lefties on electoral reform” who are opposed to the Alternative vote. "AV offers more choice, even if it’s not proportional," he argues.
Lib Dem MEP Edward McMillan-Scott believes there are better voting systems than AV. The single transferable vote (STV), he says, “is the best form of PR because every vote counts.”
Writing from the perspective of New Zealand, Tan Copsey suggests without adopting AV the UK will remain locked in the past. “Voting in Britain was like voting in New Zealand in the 1950s”, he says.
According to campaigner John Wilhelm, the Alternative Vote has “serious weaknesses” and “does a poor job of reflecting voters' preferences.” Wilhelm advocates “approval voting” because it “allows a person to vote both sincerely and strategically at the same time to better reflect his or her preferences.”
May
With the general election producing a hung parliament and a mismatch between votes and seats, Take Back Parliament organises a series of rallies in London and across the country. Nick Clegg is taken by surprise during coalition negotiations. Guest speakers at rallies include George Monboit, Mark Thomas and Anthony Barnett. The Coalition Agreement commits the Lib Dems and Tories to a referendum on AV.
John Curtice writesthat with or without AV, we can expect more hung parliaments in the future.
Next Left list “five reasons to be cheerful about the Alternative Vote.”
The New Statesman outlines how AV would have affected the election outcome in 2005
Lib Dem MP, Chris Huhne, comments that AV fails “to give voters the power they should have,” and “also fails to remedy the unfairness of the present system.”
An interesting exchange between Stuart Weir and Andy White on AV takes place on OurKingdom. The AV campaign is a “foolish crusade,” says Weir, and “as a whole would produce an unrepresentative parliament, and so adds spurious legitimacy to a bad system.” White countersthat AV would in fact “improve MPs’ legitimacy, introduce voters to preferential voting, and help persuade the political classes that the public has an appetite for reform.”
El movimiento contra la igualdad para las mujeres y las personas LGBTIQ+ perdió su bastión europeo, Viktor Orbán, impulsor de la teoría conspirativa del ‘gran reemplazo’
The current government position is bad policy, bad politics and a betrayal of what is best in Britain's history of providing sanctuary to those in need.
