Fairer votes: the dishonesty of the No campaign

The Independent today reveals the depths to which the 'No' campaign is prepared to sink in trying to prevent a fairer voting system for Britain.

A series of advertisements has been launched by the 'No' campaign, suggesting that if the move to fairer votes is defeated, there will be more kit for soldiers serving overseas, more equipment for babies in hospital, and all sorts of other extra public spending.

The trouble is, it's completely untrue.

The 'No' campaign claims that moving to a fairer voting system will cost£250 million. But of that £250 million, £82 million is the cost of the referendum itself. If that's the cost of the referendum, it will have been spent whether people vote Yes or No.

And £150 million is apparently for 'electronic counting machines'. Yet nobody has said these would be needed. According to the Financial Times, the independent Electoral Commission hasn't even considered them. And they're not required in Australia, which has used AV for a very long time.

The tactic of the 'No to AV' campaign seems to be to invent some silly and untrue figures and hope the voters will believe them. Voting 'Yes' to fairer votes on 5 May, then, would appear to be an excellent way of demonstrating that we're not as gullible as the 'No' campaign believes we are.

Oh, and just a final thought. If David Cameron doesn't believe in the AV system, shouldn't he step down as Conservative Party leader in favour of David Davis, who would have been Tory leader if the Conservatives used First Past The Post for their own elections?