AV: a riposte to my critic.

Dear Critic,

In my blog on AV I received a well written, but anonymous criticism. My critic suggested that I might be intentionally misleading people; far from it, mine has been clearly stated case against this 'miserable' electoral  system. Bizarrely my critic defends the rights of Monster Raving Looney supporters to have two votes, when those that support the mainstream parties get just one. Has my critic viewed the Monster Raving Looney party programme: their main policy to combat global warming is to put air conditioning units on the outside of buildings.

Also, dear critic, I have not claimed that AV would benefit racist parties, but it would give many of their supporters two votes. You go on to state that a system of proportional representation is the only fair method of voting; don't get me started on that!

Regards,
Tim

Protests in vain or 'down with this sort of thing'.

Today I heard a rumour that there was a fuel protest planned for the A55; I don't know if anything happened, but I would guess not. This type of protest is surely destined for another inglorious failure. I set about thinking about the most pointless protests of recent years (this does not imply my own feelings, just the outcome of the protest itself).

Here are my top three most pointless protests. At number three is the recent TUC march in London. Millions descended upon the capital with a genuine belief in their cause, however they were thwarted by anarchist extremists and a disingenuous Labour leader.

At number two is the fuel price protest of a decade ago; at the time petrol was around 80p a litre, need I say any more?

Top of the most pointless protests by some way was the Countryside Alliance march in London back in 2002. The complex title of the march, Liberty and Livelihood, probably indicated that it was destined for failure before a single green welly hit the streets of the capital. Initially the march was to protest against the government's plan to outlaw the killing of foxes for fun. However, by the time the march took place everyone from the so-called 'countryside' had joined in; comically, many of the marchers were actually against hunting foxes. Others wanted to save post offices, or more buses, more facilities, fewer facilities, and a myriad of related competing issues. It goes without saying that all of this came to nothing, apart from a legacy of ugly signs that still litter the 'countryside'.

Classic Father Ted:  Down with this sort of thing.

Everton 2 Manchester City 1

Busy match day scene in Goodison Road.

I am not very good at golf, but each round I make one or two decent shots that gives me the encouragement to come back and play again. The same is true of a season spent following Everton. There have been some very low bad times in this topsy turvey season; I still shudder at the thought of the Reading FA Cup match.

However, today was the game that will bring me back for more next season. The Manchester City billionaires came to play and in the first half they looked like a high class team; they went into half time one goal up. The second half witnesses an invigorated Everton pull City apart. The atmosphere in the ground was fantastic and under this kind of pressure City soon crumbled. As the Everton manager said afterwards: you can buy a team but you can't buy team spirit.

Everton attack the Gwladys Street goal: some individual City players cost more than the entire Everton team.

My last word on AV.

My last word on the Alternative Vote, well, maybe. I was pondering on the Alternative Vote earlier and thought of a delicious irony if the 'Yes' campaign win and we adopt this electoral system. The irony is this: in the 19th century the vote was limited to the rich and the educated (men); even well into the 20th century two votes were given to graduates of many universities and those who had businesses in one constituency and lived in another. Now, if we adopt AV we will be giving two votes to the mad (voters who pick the Monster Raving Looney party as their first choice), and to the truly nasty (those who vote BNP or UKIP). Perhaps will be left to reflect on a time when we gave one person one vote. If the 'Yes' campaign wins today History will have turned a full circle.

Godwin's Law

I have recently come across Godwin's Law. Basically it predicts that all debates and discussions will eventually  make a Nazi reference; and then, according to this useful Law, the argument is lost. I go to lots of debates and  there is a strong element of truth in Godwin's Law.

I have not felt like blogging about the London wedding last Friday. However, there was one element of the wedding that reminded me of Godwin's Law. It was the moment the Lancaster bombers flew over Buckingham Palace, and everyone seemed to ooh and aah.

Godwin's Law

It might not exactly fit the true meaning of Godwin's Law, but there is a point where every national celebration harks back to the Second World War. We have two young people getting married in 2011, and what do we get, yes, Lancaster bombers that did an effective job in defeating Hitler 70 or more years ago.

Of course we should remember the events of the war against fascism, but why the memory of the murderous bombing campaigns needs to be invoked in a wedding celebration defeats me. Yet even here Godwin's Law has the answer: the unity of purpose displayed by the British people in the war was the one occasion when the people of this country have been truly united; and thus in a search for symbols of British national unity the Lancaster bomber is sadly top of the list. As Godwin's Law would have it, the argument is therefore lost. We really must move on.

Bangor University through the ages.

Yesterday I drove Tom back to his digs in Bangor for the start of his summer term. Before returning home I did a brief tour of the city and reminisced over my time there as a student in the 1980s. In fact Tom is the third generation of our family to study at Bangor as my Dad studied Physics there in the late 1950s.

Comparing the experiences of the three generations enables one to view the changes that have taken place in higher education in the past half century or so. I will try to return to this theme in future blogs, but for the time being I can identify three changes to the student experience at Bangor: first, there has been a steady increase in student numbers; the university has more than tripled in size since my Dad's time there. Secondly, there is a much greater choice of degree programmes, ranging from IT and Computing, to many areas of health care. However, the 'traditional' subjects have been reduced: for example, Maths, Physics, and Theology are no longer available for undergraduates. Thirdly, the student experience is far less elitist; the academic ceremonial associated with the wearing of gowns and formal dinners has long gone.

This blogger on Bangor mountain (c1984).

AV revisited.

Referendums throw together some unusual (and uncomfortable) political alliances. David Cameron has, in reality, been the spokesman for the anti-AV group, which includes a majority in his own party, and probably a majority in the Labour Party. While Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg have jointly carried the banner for the Yes campaign.

On the Andrew Marr programme Cameron spoke passionately against AV. To my mind he made two telling points: first that the present system of First Past the Post allows the electorate to get rid of governments, rather than the politicians merely swopping chairs and forming another coalition. The second point he made was that under AV only some people get a second vote. Let me explain: under AV when the votes are counted, and if one candidate does not have 50% of the vote, then the votes of the lowest placed are redistributed according to their second preference. The lowest candidate could be BNP (for example) and therefore only those voters might decide the winner. The rest of the second preferences may not be counted.

AV leads to profoundly dishonest politics. Coalitions are by their nature often dishonest as the electors rarely get what they voted for! Note the current example and the damage this is doing to the Liberal Democrats. Clegg claims that AV will make politicians work harder for their votes. This is sheer nonsense as it will merely encourage politicians to be vague and non-committal for the fear of alienating second preference voters.

I still find it impossible to find anything positive in the Alternative Vote.