Sir, In your leading article (“No alternative”, Apr 1) you do not even mention, let alone challenge, the strong argument for the alternative vote (AV) system. It is that the result of a first-past-the-post (FPTP) election may depend not on what voters most want, but on whether minority candidates put themselves forward or refrain from doing so.
AV makes life easier for the voter, not harder. It eliminates the need for tactical voting and guessing how other voters will vote.
Professor David J. Dunstan
Guildford, Surrey
Sir, Your leading article did not address one issues in support of a more proportional voting system, even AV: namely that FPTP only works at all by accident. The unequal nature of the UK has resulted, for the past 60 years or so, in a division of seats that is, roughly, one-third Labour, one-third Conservative and one-third Liberal and/or “floating”. The more equal the country becomes, and the more evenly balanced the three parties become, the more likely it is that under FPTP any party with 34 per cent of the votes would win all the seats. Taking the small step of AV now is a useful move in an inevitable direction.
Advertisement
Dr Bruce Lloyd
London NW6
Sir, A flaw in AV is that the alternative votes of only those whose first-choice candidate gets eliminated get taken into account.
For example, if I vote for the candidate who wins on the first round, my preference for a second choice candidate is ignored in determining which candidate should be eliminated.
In some circumstances, where I anticipate a close result between three candidates, I might therefore have to consider putting my second choice first, to help the candidate I oppose most strongly to be eliminated.
Advertisement
Dr Derek Haylock
Norwich, Norfolk