UK - Lord Jenkin's Proposals

David Marsay djmarsay at
Fri Oct 9 04:31:18 PDT 1998

In response to:
> From:          Bart Ingles <bartman at>
> Subject:       Re: UK - Lord Jenkin's Proposals

> David Marsay wrote:

> Good point.  I bet many voters would have a problem with a winner who
> had a very small percentage of the first-choice vote.
Yes. I was trying to say that this is an issue, and so one could 
'rationalise' AV, not that AV is perfect.
> If you mean that all of the parties might tend toward center, that is
> probably better than the opposite outcome, and if true would seem to
> obviate the concerns of those who believe that a method is needed to
> favor compromise candidates.  Actual experience will show which is the
> greater problem.
The UK party grandees have (some time ago!) supported FPP by saying 
that it leads to polarised parties who practice fighting in 
parliament and hence produce a good government that can be tough with 
foreigners who have namby-pamby coalitions. This minority(?) 
preference for 'strong' government is possible the only serious 
objection to AV+. We shall see. 

>  minimal IRO allowing voters first- and second-choice
> would allow up to three dominant parties to emerge, adding a third
> choice would allow four, etc.  
> What do you think?

I like the idea. It would have the advantage of simplifying ballots. 
My guess is 2 or 3 places would be about right for UK general 
elections. But I'm not entirely comfortable with it.
Sorry folks, but apparently I have to do this. :-(
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer
and do not represent the views, policy or understanding of
any other person or official body.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list