Peer hits out at 'danger' of AV vote system

Published on Tuesday 15 February 2011 14:46

Switching to the Alternative Vote (AV) electoral system would be "dangerous" for democracy and cost the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds, opponents of the plan have warned.

The NOtoAV campaign intensified its attack on the proposal, as the coalition attempted to push through legislation to trigger a national poll on 5 May.

Labour peer Lord Winston said: "Until recently, I think I would have been in favour of an AV system or some method of changing the system for how we elect representatives in the House of Commons.

"It is only from seeing the consequences of a hung parliament that has made me understand the danger that we have."

The renowned fertility expert said the lack of a clear winner from the general election meant the government was introducing controversial changes, including reforms to the health service, without a mandate from the electorate.

The director of the no campaign, Matthew Elliott, branded the mooted ballot "Nick Clegg's referendum" and said AV would leave the country at the mercy of "political fixes".

He claimed the complex system for choosing MPs would require electronic counting machines at a cost of 130 million, and require 26m be spent on voter re-education.

On top of that would be the 82m cost of the referendum itself and 9m to inform the electorate about the issues ahead of 5 May's planned vote.

Costs were likely to be still further inflated by a need for extra polling stations, election staff training and machine-readable ballot papers, the campaign said.

However, the yes campaign dismissed the figures as "fantasy", pointing out that the referendum costs were being incurred anyway, and Australia used AV without voting machines.

Katie Ghose, chairman of the Yes to Fairer Votes campaign, said: "Their make-believe machines don't exist in Australia and won't exist in the UK."