Democracy (AV) is Coming - Electoral Reformers: DON'T F**K UP!

The UK is definitely getting at least a referendum on electoral reform, and may just introduce it straight out, without a referendum. The Lib Dems now have the choice between supporting a Conservative government perceived as more legitimate which will give them a referendum on preferential voting/"alternative vote" (AV) or a Labour-led government, perceived as less legitimate, but now willing to offer AV without a referendum (perceptions do not reflect either constitutional or democratic realities, but unavoidable). I've written a lot on preferential voting and why it's the only politically possible electoral reform in Canada. I was also the first to note, I think, here and Macleans (page 2 of comments, top), that this is where the UK would end up, and this would almost certainly create huge momentum for a similar reform, probably preceded by a referendum, here in Canada. If at least a plebiscite is held in the UK, the only way Canada won't have one, if Liberals (et.al.?) take power, IS IF CANADIAN ELECTORAL REFORMERS FIND A WAY TO OVERPLAY THEIR HAND AND FUCK UP AGAIN, AS IN THE PAST. The reality is, QC could not accept any reform more proportional than AV. And more proportional systems have been repeatedly rejected by over half the population (Ont+BC+PEI) already. Remember these two pieces of advice, electoral reformers:
Preferential Vote & KISS: Saunders, Not Poli "Scientists"

But I'm starting to suspect that reform advocates would secretly prefer status quo as it allows them to lecture endlessly from height of incomprehensible "haut en bas" self-righteousness. How else to explain their affection for complicating & obfuscating the most simple concepts? The great advantages of preferential system is it hasn't been rejected, one, we already use it, two, as Saunders notes, it's easy as it can be done without any changes to electoral map or system (or ballot paper even), etc., three, AND IT'S SIMPLE!!! Please, electoral reform freaks, if you are at all serious, can we stick to Saunder's explanation and not your baroque over-complications? Or do you desperately want another group of soi-disant ordinary Canadians locked into a room with poli "sci" prof fantasists until they succumb to Stockholm syndrome and propose yet another incomprehensible 17-faceted electoral system that only poli "sci" nerds can love? Stick with this, SVP: "The system, known as the alternative vote in Britain or the preferential ballot in Canada, creates an “instant runoff” where, if no candidate gets 50 per cent of the first-choice votes, the second choices are then added to the tallies, and so on until a candidate achieves a majority."

Framing Coalition Question in Election: It's All About Steve

The legislative agenda would be well advised as having the restoration of democracy as its cornerstone, as the right thing and to gain support. Among the various propositions, might I reiterate the importance of electoral reform and the fact that the only reform that could ever be acceptable to QC, given its unique position, is preferential voting, which far from penalising the Bloc, as other proposals would, might indeed aid it, a bit, as the insurance policy party in QC, in the short term, 1-2 elections, max. The change in our democratic culture as a result of preferential voting (civilised debate, hence necessarily more policy-focussed, and leading to greater respect for institutions by parties, etc.) would eventually profit smaller parties and increase desire to be part of governing coalitions, pulling folk away from Bloc. But it's fair to say that the Bloc would probably profit slightly in the first preferential election, and that's exactly why it's the only electoral reform with a chance. NDP would have to be willing to put some water in their wine, take the medium to long view, recognise the perfect is the enemy of the good, that any more proportional system is a practical no-go, and decide whether their principles actually mean something: is it more important to stop neo-cons and promote progressive ideals, with chance for NDP to gain down the line, electorally & ideologically, after culture change, or to care more about the actual number of seats the NDP gets in following election, knowing full well they'll never top 18%? Enlightened self-interest would dictate NDP favour preferential voting, especially with aging, increasingly conservative population, who will eventually give Cons a majority under current system, with all that implies. They could agree to abide by results of national referendum on question, seems fair compromise in governing platform with Libs. And NDP would be running in next campaign as government-experienced, remember? So first election hit might well be less than expected, hell, they might even win seats, running on governing record as legitimate government party.