Friday, February 18, 2011
AV again
William Hague, the patron of the No campaign in the alternative vote (AV) referendum, has said he would be very disappointed if the campaign did not identify its donors.
IMO: Hague is probably right when he says PR would be better than AV, but the choice is not there because of the Condemn coalition, as either AV,or (better) PR could go some way to ridding us of that moat-and-duckpond crowd and none of them seem to want that. He is also right that people will want to know the names of the donors, as they seem to be people like him and Cameron, not exactly ordinary members of the general public. The Yes campaign, on the other hand, seems to be 90% funded by the charities who act for the poor, whereas the No campaign is funded by politicians and we can draw our own conclusions as to how much they help the poor and ill.
IMO: Hague is probably right when he says PR would be better than AV, but the choice is not there because of the Condemn coalition, as either AV,or (better) PR could go some way to ridding us of that moat-and-duckpond crowd and none of them seem to want that. He is also right that people will want to know the names of the donors, as they seem to be people like him and Cameron, not exactly ordinary members of the general public. The Yes campaign, on the other hand, seems to be 90% funded by the charities who act for the poor, whereas the No campaign is funded by politicians and we can draw our own conclusions as to how much they help the poor and ill.
# posted by uv : 3:37 AM
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
