Letter: Why Britain needs the Alternative Vote system

Letter: So, the date has been set for the referendum on the Alternative Vote system (AV) and the great debate has begun.

In the article "Cameron and Clegg clash on vote views" (Star, February 18), David Cameron describes AV as "unfair".

In the 2010 General Election, out of 649 seats contested, in only 215 of them - less than one in three - did the winner achieve more than 50 per cent of the vote.

That means in more than two-thirds of constituencies, MPs were elected despite more than half of voters voting against them.

I would not describe that as "fair", or even democratic.

However, under AV, a candidate would only be elected if more than half the voters showed a preference for him or her over the closest rival.

That is surely more fair.

That is only one of the advantages of AV; I shall write about some of the others at a later date.

The choice we make on May 5 will be the most important event in the history of our electoral system since women got the vote.

I urge readers on both sides of the argument to write and make their views known, so that we can fully debate this issue.

Sean Bayley

Telford