The true cost of AV.

In the last week (since the bill got Royal Ascent) the campaigns for the Referendum on First Past The Post (FPTP) Vs. the Alternative Vote (AV) voting systems has really stepped up a pace.

I've covered why I believe our current voting system should be upgraded to AV here, and I don't really want to cover old ground now.

What I do however want to mention is the cynical lies being used by the No2AV campaign.

It started when they announced that introducing AV would cost the UK Taxpayer £250m, and then used that as the basis for their advertising campaign.

Apart from the issue with these sickening adverts suggesting that the choice is between AV and other essential things (it isn't), the major problem is that the sums done to find the £250m quotation don't add up. the No campaign's own website break down the costs as being:

£82 Million - for the referendum itself

£9 Million - for voter education (ahead of the referendum)

£130 Million - for the introduction of electronic voting machines

£26 Million - for voter education (at the next elections)

Total Cost - £247 Million

And here's the problem with this valuation. It's Bullshit

Firstly, £82 Million for the referendum. This figure is massively exaggerated, simply because it's based on the cost of a referendum alone. but May 5th isn't just a referendum, there are local council elections happening around the country that day as well as elections in the devolved nations, the cost of adding a referendum to this is going to be minimal. the polling stations are already going to be open, the officers are already going to be present, the only actual extra cost to the existing elections is going to come from the paper and the time added to counting the election ballots.

Secondly, even if this £82 Million figure was correct. Whichever system people vote for it's going to cost that for the referendum itself. And yet you aren't seeing the No campaign asking people to boycott the ballot to save the money, people voting No is going to cost as much as people voting Yes. which brings me onto my third point...

£130 Million for the introduction of electronic voting machines, this is the biggest fabrication by the No campaign yet, there simply isn't going to be an introduction of electronic voting machines. Australia has managed to use AV in its elections since 1918 without the introduction of electronic voting machines, but the No campaign seems to assume the British electorate is too dumb to vote in order of preference without the help of machines. And even though the government and the Electoral Commission (the impartial organisation that organises the UK's elections and referendums) have both said there are no plans to introduce the machines, the No campaign is still using it's £250 Million figure as a reason to vote no.

Lastly, £26 Million in voter education in preparation for the next election is also massively inflated, currently your ballot paper lists candidates and asks you to mark an X in the box of the candidate you want to win. Simply changing that text to ask voters to put a 1 in the box of their preferred candidate and 2 in the box of their next preference and so on, will not cost £26 Million.

Unfortunately this £250 Million cost claim is just one of the No campaigns many attacks on the referendum and AV which doesn't stand up to scrutiny, but I guess when you're trying to defend an electoral system which no longer works properly and therefore can't defend it, all you can do is attack the proposed change.

Prepare to see much more of this negative campaigning from No2AV. Meanwhile, Yes to Fairer Votes (the Pro-AV campaign) has published this video of reasons to vote yes.

I know which side I'm on, can you see past No2AV's lies??

Vote YES in May

Shep