I'm no nearer the truth on the great AV debate

12 April 2012

When the late Sir James Goldsmith founded the Referendum Party, the joke went around that one of his friends, the socialite Carla Powell, thought it was a social event and wondered whether there'd be a finger buffet.

Much the same spirit seems to have entered the debate on voting reform. Having despaired of explaining the intricacies of the system to ordinary punters, the Yes to AV and No to AV camps have simply set about recruiting as many celebrities as they can.

Yes to AV so far has mostly comedians and runners: Eddie Izzard, Kriss Akabusi, Jonathan Ross and Chris Addison. No to AV has a bunch of historians: Amanda Foreman, Niall Ferguson, David Starkey and Antony Beevor. One instinctively assumes the historians are more likely to know what they're talking about - but then one that hears Joanna Lumley has joined the Yes campaign and one returns to a state of uncertainty.

The argument that, because first past the post tends to return Tory governments, you should reject it if you don't like Tories is perfectly fatuous: a short-term, narrowly political position in a discussion about a profound, long-term change to the voting system.

First past the post, its opponents complain with justice, however, often returns strong overall majorities for parties that fewer than half of us voted for. AV, on the other hand, gives the chance of a clean sweep for a party that was nobody's first choice at all: a thousand-year-rule for None Of The Above (or "The Liberal Democrats", as I believe they're calling themselves these days). Neither exactly thrills the heart.

Proportional representation sounded to me like a good idea but we're not being allowed to vote for that (even Nick Clegg, who's backing it, thinks AV is a "miserable little compromise"). For a period somewhat shorter than the shake of a lamb's tail, about six months ago, I understood the difference between STV and AV, but I'm afraid it's gone.

Friends, I have not a clue - not a Scooby Doo - which voting system is the best. Someone quotes Winston Churchill at me (he won the war, so he must be right; oh, hang on: he's a Tory so he must be wrong). Someone else shouts that AV is "undemocratic"; someone else shouts that FPTP is "undemocratic". Then they raise the level of debate to "mad", "crazy", "discredited" etc.

It may be that I'm a lone idiot but I suspect that my situation is the general one. The disproportion between the degree of certainty on both sides and the complexity of the actual issue seems to me a surefire indicator of humbug. My advice: toss a coin.

The Evening Standard will be holding a debate this Wednesday 6 April in Westminster on the forthcoming AV referendum. Chaired by Clive Anderson, speakers for the YES campaign are Ken Livingstone and Vince Cable. Pushing for the NO Campaign will be Michael Howard and Martin Cross. If you would like to take part in the debate, please apply for free tickets at standard.co.uk/avdebate

The saddest ticket in town

"Boo! Refund!" So, it is reported, did Charlie Sheen's adoring fans greet their tiger-blooded warlock when the first night of his new career as a stand-up comic found him rambling and underprepared rather than, as advertised, a Violent Torpedo of Truth.

Doesn't your heart bleed for them? Mr Sheen responded to catcalls with the words "Already got your f***ing money, dude". Graceless that may be but he has a point. If you pay good money for a ticket in the hope that a delusional wifebeater in the depths of drug-addiction will have a nervous breakdown on stage for your entertainment, you deserve everything you get.

Mystery of Jas

Walking through Highgate's Waterlow Park, I often pass a piece of park furniture that bemuses me. In among all the benches with their brass plaques is a lone armchair, whose plaque reads: "With thanks for the life of Jas Janikiewicz 1945-1988." Who was Jas, to merit a bench on which there's room for only one person? Google is no help, except to indicate Glasgow University has an Italian language prize that bears the name. Was Jas a great lover of solitude or did the whip-round only run to an armchair? I'd hope the answer is more whimsical and personal. Can anyone tell me?

The university fairness ombudsman, Offa, is taking on new staff to cope with the number of applications it's receiving from universities wanting to charge the top level of £9,000 in tuition fees. Ministers are said to have been "taken by surprise" that so many institutions want to be so well funded. Really? Well, duh, as we graduates like to say. You'd think that a government ideologically in love with profit and the laws of supply and demand would have seen this one coming, no?

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in