View source for Alternative vote plus

{{Short description|Mixed electoral system with compensation}}
{{For|the voting system that was the subject of a referendum in the UK|instant-runoff voting}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2022}}
{{Electoral systems}}

The '''alternative vote plus (AV+)''', or '''alternative vote top-up''', is a [[Mixed-member proportional representation|semi-proportional]] [[voting system]]. AV+ was devised by the 1998 [[Jenkins Commission (UK)|Jenkins Commission]] which first proposed the idea as a system that could be used for elections to the [[Parliament of the United Kingdom]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/4090.htm |title=Report of the Independent Commission on the Voting System |access-date=2009-05-25 |url-status=dead |archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140131031506/http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/4090.htm |archive-date=2014-01-31 }}</ref>

AV+ a variant of the [[additional-member system]] which works in two parts: the 'AV' part and the 'plus' part. As in the [[alternative vote]] system, candidates are ranked numerically in order of preference. The important difference is that an additional group of members would be elected through [[party-list proportional representation|regional party lists]] to ensure a degree of proportionality; in typical proposals, these members are 15–20% of the whole body. More specifically, each voter would get a second vote to elect a county or regional-level representative from a list of candidates of more than one person per party. The number of votes cast in this vote would decide how many representatives from that county or region would go on to parliament. In systems with an [[electoral threshold]] on regional seats, votes are transferred in order of voters' numerical preference until it puts a party above the threshold, or reaches a party already above.

== Reaction in the UK ==
Then Prime Minister [[Tony Blair]] issued a statement, saying that the report "makes a well-argued and powerful case for the system it recommends"<ref>{{cite news|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/the_jenkins_report/203930.stm|title= BBC News - The Jenkins Report - Cautious reaction on voting reform|access-date=2009-05-25 | date=1998-10-29}}</ref> and that "it is very much a modification of the existing Westminster system, rather than any full blown PR system as practised in other countries." He also praised Lord Jenkins for his work and gave the recommendations a cautious welcome, pointing out in particular that change would help address the "complete absence of Conservative representation in Scotland", a reference to the [[1997 United Kingdom general election|then most recent election]] in which the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservatives]] failed to win a single seat in Scotland, despite winning 17.5% of the Scottish vote.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.scottishaffairs.org/backiss/pdfs/sa20/SA20_Denver.pdf|title=THE 1997 GENERAL ELECTION IN SCOTLAND: AN ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS|access-date=2011-04-22|date=Summer 1997|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111003123554/http://www.scottishaffairs.org/backiss/pdfs/sa20/SA20_Denver.pdf|archive-date=2011-10-03|url-status=dead}}</ref>

However, leading figures in the Cabinet at the time (such as Home Secretary [[Jack Straw]], Deputy Prime Minister [[John Prescott]], Chancellor [[Gordon Brown]], and [[Margaret Beckett]]) and the [[Labour NEC]], all strongly opposed reform of the voting system, and blocked change at that time.{{cn|date=July 2024}} 

The report was welcomed by the [[Liberal Democrats (UK)|Liberal Democrats]] and the [[Scottish National Party|SNP]], although at the time the Liberal Democrats remained largely committed to [[Single transferable vote|STV]], but preferred AV+ to [[first-past-the-post]].<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.takebackpower.org/100_days_to_save_democracy.html| title = Liberal Democrat proposal from TakeBackPower.org | access-date = 2009-05-26| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090531090053/http://www.takebackpower.org/100_days_to_save_democracy.html| archive-date= 31 May 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref>
The report was heavily criticised by the Conservative party, with leader [[William Hague]] branding its proposals "a dog's breakfast".

In a May 2009 article in ''[[The Times]]'', Health Secretary [[Alan Johnson]] called for a referendum on the adoption of this system as part of the response to the 2009 [[United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal|parliamentary expenses scandal]]. In this piece he praised the system as "an elegant solution".<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6355254.ece | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100430063555/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6355254.ece | url-status=dead | archive-date=30 April 2010 | title = The Times: There is an alternative to our damaged system - Alan Johnson MP | access-date = 2009-05-25 | location=London | date=2009-05-25}}</ref> [[David Cameron]], Leader of the Conservative Party, declared on May 26 that his party did not support the AV+ system, or any other form of [[proportional representation]], as it would end up choosing a government "on the basis of secret backroom deals".<ref>{{cite news | url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8067505.stm| title = BBC news: Cameron in 'people power' pledge  | access-date = 2009-05-26 | date=2009-05-26 | work=BBC News| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090526013114/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8067505.stm| archive-date= 26 May 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref>

In June 2009, it was reported by the [[BBC]] that the [[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom|Prime Minister]], [[Gordon Brown]], was considering changing the electoral system as part of a package of constitutional reform.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8092235.stm| title = BBC news: Brown to propose electoral reform  | access-date = 2009-06-09 | date=2009-06-10 | work=BBC News| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090610013111/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8092235.stm| archive-date= 10 June 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref> In February 2010, the Labour government under Gordon Brown offered a Commons vote on a referendum for an alternative vote system, possibly manoeuvering for political positioning in case of a [[hung parliament]] following the general election on May 6.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8492272.stm| title = BBC news: MPs set for electoral reform vote  | access-date = 2010-02-01 | date=2010-02-01 | work=BBC News| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100204092840/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8492272.stm| archive-date= 4 February 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref> In a BBC interview on Election Night 2010, Home Secretary [[Alan Johnson]] suggested he would like to see the AV+ system introduced if a deal with the Liberal Democrats became necessary.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/may/06/uk-election-night-instant-comment| title = Guardian Election Night Live  | access-date = 2010-02-01 | date=2010-02-01 | work=Guardian | location=London | first1=Jackie | last1=Ashley | first2=Julian | last2=Glover | first3=Martin | last3=Kettle | first4=Anne | last4=Perkins}}</ref>

[[2011 United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum|A national referendum]] on the [[Alternative Vote]] system was granted as part of the [[Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition agreement]],<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7144915.ece| title=Cameron won't lead campaign to save first-past-the-post voting |access-date = 2010-06-06 | location=London | work=The Times | first=Jonathan | last=Oliver | date=2010-06-06}}{{dead link|date=September 2024|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref> but not AV+. The Jenkins Commission rejected plain AV on the basis that it did little to relieve disproportionality,<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/chap-5.htm#c5-a |title=The Report of the Independent Commission on the Voting System |access-date=2011-04-16 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20021217012514/http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/chap-5.htm#c5-a |archive-date=2002-12-17 |url-status=dead }}</ref> but favoured it over first-past-the-post as the basis for AV+.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/chap-7.htm#c7-d |title=The Report of the Independent Commission on the Voting System |access-date=2011-04-16 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091012010247/http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/chap-7.htm#c7-d |archive-date=2009-10-12 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

The [[2011 United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum|referendum on AV]] was held on 5 May 2011. Voters rejected the proposed AV voting system by a vote of 68% to 32% in favour of retaining First Past the Post.  The turnout of registered voters was 42%.

== Properties ==
AV+ has several properties which may be considered advantages or disadvantages based on ones views on how an electoral system should work and what effects it should produce. Common arguments in favour or against are similar to those relating to its component systems, AV and AMS.

* [[Single-member constituencies]] would exist under the scheme, so every voter would have a local MP, but not all MPs would be elected in an SMD.
* Because of compensation (additional seats), results would be more proportional result than FPTP or AV, but would still give a built-in advantage to the largest party and allow one-party rule during landslide years.{{Citation needed|date=May 2022}} Coalition governments, which include the opinions of multiple movements of the people, are more likely.
* Would lessen the problems of '[[Split-ticket voting|split voting]]' and the necessity of [[tactical voting]]{{Citation needed|date=May 2022}}.
* Decreases the chances of 'safe seats' and MPs holding seats for life.{{Citation needed|date=May 2022}}
* MPs will have to secure 50% of votes to win a constituency seat - making them more accountable and working harder to win over a broader appeal.{{Citation needed|date=May 2022}} Limits the chances for extremists to gain power scraping in with minority support.{{Citation needed|date=May 2022}} The AV part shuts down the ability for local candidates to slip in with just a minority of the votes.

* It is more complex than FPTP for voters and it might cost more to count the votes
* It will lead to "two types of MP", as a majority would be linked directly to a constituency with a minority with a larger area overlapping the first group. This might weaken the psychological link between voters and their representatives.{{Citation needed|date=May 2022}}

== See also ==
*[[Outline of democracy]]
*[[Mixed-member proportional representation]]

==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7ydAowkesA Alternative vote - what is it?] Simple animation explaining Alternative Vote system (not AV+)
* [https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/alternative-vote-plus/ Electoral Reform Society page on the AV+ system]

{{voting systems}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Alternative Vote Top-Up}}
[[Category:Mixed electoral systems]]
[[Category:Semi-proportional electoral systems]]
[[Category:Electoral systems]]
[[Category:Preferential electoral systems]]
[[Category:Elections in the United Kingdom]]