£250 million reasons to say NO: Why our country can’t afford AV

PRESS RELEASE | tags: ,

 

NO to AV – the non-partisan, cross-party campaign against the Alternative Vote – calculate that AV will cost the country up to £250 million

Today NO to AV have released the first calculation of the total cost of the Alternative Vote on British taxpayers’ with the following key findings (click here to read the full report):

  • The total cost of the referendum will be up to £250 million. The spending breaks down as: the referendum itself costs £82 million with the cost of voter education ahead of the referendum at £9 million. Should AV pass, the cost of electronic vote counting necessitated by AV will be £130 million and the cost of voter education with AV will be £26 million.
  • And this is a conservative estimate because there will likely be additional costs – more polling stations because AV ballots take longer to complete, additional election staff training, and customized machine-readable ballot papers.
  • This is an entirely unacceptable expense on an issue few people care about at a time of economic crisis – we’re all paying for Clegg’s ‘miserable little compromise’.
  • £250 million could instead pay for 2,053 doctors, 5,719 police officers, 6,297 teachers, 8,107 nurses, 36,000 hip replacements or 60,000 school places.

Commenting, Matthew Elliott, Campaign Director of NO to AV said:

“The British people will be staggered to learn that our politicians are considering squandering £250 million of taxpayers’ money on a new voting system at a time when they are being told to tighten their belts. Who really thinks the national priority should be the introduction of the alternative vote rather than more nurses, more teachers and more police officers.  The simple fact is our country can’t afford AV.”

ENDS

For media enquiries please contact the NOtoAV Press Office on press@no2av.org or 07919 124 975


NOTES TO EDITORS

1. NO to AV is the non-partisan, cross-party campaign which has been established to campaign for a ‘No’ vote in the proposed referendum on the voting system in May 2011. For more information please see www.no2av.org/about

<iframe title=”YouTube video player” width=”560″ height=”349″ src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/NTEPgGGDT0Q” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

Comments


  • http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk Anthony Smith

    Just think how much money we could save if we simply reduced the number of elections we have!

  • MCB

    If saving government money is so important, why don’t we withdraw from the EU?

  • Wotson

    Cheap at the price for real democracy. FPTP is corrupt and used nowhere in the civilised West

  • Richard Hewson

    AV should only be allowed if at the very least 75% of those eligible to vote in any election, agree, and that there is a clear majority for AV at the election – otherwise a waste of time and money. An AV election should be at the same time as a vote on membership of the EU.

  • http://twitter.com/dampman Chris Bradburn

    There may well be a case to argue for PR, but AV is NOT PR

  • Richard

    Nick Clegg’s personal crusade is not worth £250.00 let alone £250,000,000.00

  • Peter John High

    Nick Clegg and the students was/is bad enough to see spread across in the media. OH, has that been settled?

    Open minded person on some policies but are we not in some up heaval as a country at moment?

  • Major Fortesque-Smythe (Retd.)

    Our soldiers need bulletproof vests, not democratic oversight! What the “YES TO AV” camp don’t realise is that every single penny that is spent on AV is money that could be spent fighting Johnny Taliban. Our current first-past-the-post electoral system costs absolutely nothing – in fact, it pays for itself in the increased wealth that trickles down from the hard-working bankers who benefit so much.

  • Carolina Traveller

    If Stephen Fry and Eddy Izzard are in favour then it must be BAD.

  • colin williams

    This is referendum is for the Liberals to have more seats-no thanks