I say the Bill is going to meet with strong opposition in The House of Lords, and hasn't a hope of becoming law before the next election...and I say that the cynic in me says that the government knew that when it put forward the amendment in the first place.
This is clearly a sop to the Liberal Democrats to get their support if there is a hung Parliament at the next election. Although the latter would prefer the "Single Transferable Vote" method of PR they see this as a step in the right direction. Coming so late in the Labour term it is a ploy.
Other pundits (dare I say even more qualified than you) disagree with you but I do not want to endlessly prolong this discussion since , as FE says , it won't go through in time anyway. Referenda are unusual in our system and the Government reneged on the Manifesto promise to hold one on the recent EU issue using a narrow meaning of the word treaty, so it seems odd they want one on this matter.
"Now, the alternative vote system supposes that we, the voters are engaged enough and intelligent enough to determine fourth and fifth choices. 'X is better on health and education but Y is stronger on defence and lives more locally. On balance I'll rate Y fourth and X fifth'."
Sounds admirable, but the Chilcot enquiry has demonstrated that MPs and even ministers have little say in the important decisions that will affect our lives for years to come.
While Tony was plotting war, Gordon was fretting over his own job, should Tony come out of it even stronger. That gives an idea of the intellectual thought process given to such matters.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.