Dear Guido Fawkes, Really – is that the best you can do?

Dear Guido,

Really, I’m disappointed.

Is that the best you can do?

It’s actually easy to see how (a) we can have AV and (b) still have overnight election counts. There’s no contradiction or problem with me being on the record as supporting both.

Not only is it easy, it’s ridiculously easy.

Take a look at the evidence: the Mayoral elections run all around Britain on a similar scale, i.e. across a handful of constituencies. Count up the number of hours their counts take. Start at 10pm, run the clock for those number of hours and bingo – it’s all perfectly possible.

So fancy a little wager on whether or not counting machines will be used at the next general election?

Best wishes,


12 responses to “Dear Guido Fawkes, Really – is that the best you can do?”

  1. “Tell me, what do you think first attracted Electoral Reform Services Ltd, lobbyists for, and operators of electronic voting systems, to give £1m to Yes2Av?”

    They didn’t. The Electoral Reform Society – a non-profit organisation which is a shareholder in that company – did. Different organisations. The Electoral Reform Society says ( http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=45 )
    “ERS policy on E-voting

    Given the lack of evidence that e-voting increases turnout, and the continuing concerns over the security of the processes, the Society doesn’t believe that we’re ready for E-voting yet.”

  2. Or just abandon the obsession with “on the night” counting of the election.

    The position of ERSL – and it’s tacit support for other flawed election process such as some of the early Mayoral referenda was the reason why I wouldn’t join the ERS.

  3. ERS Ltd and the Electoral Reform Society are two separate organisations. The Electoral Reform Society and Yes To Fairer Votes are also two separate organisations. The Electoral Reform Society has made no secret that its end goal is – not ‘PR’, a vague, catch-all term, but specifically STV. However, that is not the goal of Yes To Fairer Votes, who exist solely for the referendum campaign and have one goal only – the introduction of AV. After that the campaign will break up and the various organisations involved will go their separate ways.

    As for the Electoral Reform Society being ‘a black flag operation for ERS Ltd’, ERSL must be both *VERY* careful about covering their tracks and also *VERY* stupid – I mean, to form your false flag operation *a hundred and four years before forming the thing it’s a front for* takes an immense amount of planning. And then to mess all that up by giving them such similar names.

  4. (Disclosure – such as it is – I am a member of the Yes To Fairer Votes campaign. I am *not* a member of the Electoral Reform Society. In my local campaign the ERS have been much less active than Unlock Democracy and Make Votes Count. I am a member of Unlock Democracy.)

  5. You are being very literalist.

    The million quid didn’t come from a bake sale, it came from ERS Ltd via ERS into Yes2AV. ERS Ltd stands to do extremely well out of a change from FPTP.

  6. *How* does it stand to do well? You keep making unsupported allegations without backing it up with a single shred of evidence. ERSL is a major source of funding for the ERS, which is a major source of funding for Yes To Fairer Votes. Nobody has denied either of those things. To go from that to Yes To Fairer Votes being a ‘black flag operation’ would require some evidence. You could just as easily say it’s a front for Nestle because the money for the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust (the other major donor) came from the Rowntree’s Chocolate company.
    Or indeed you could say the No campaign is a front for… oh wait, unlike the Yes campaign, which has actually named its principal donors, the No campaign refuses to do that, doesn’t it? Strange…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments and data you submit with them will be handled in line with the privacy and moderation policies.