‘Alternative vote’ ruse will not help gain us international respect

More to the point I have a moral sense of fairness, which Wishart appears to lack.

Wishart correctly identifies “the profound unfairness of first-past-the-post”, which in Westminster can result in a win on about a third of the votes. Last December the Tories won a majority of 56% of the seats with only 43.6% of the votes. The SNP have 81% of Scotland’s MPs on just 45% of Scotland’s vote. Both results fail to accurately represent the wishes of the voters.

READ MORE: Alternative pro-independence votes may be key to Yes majority

Wishart further correctly identifies that Scotland’s Additional Members System (AMS) addresses this “profound unfairness”, but only after she has first trashed the proportional principle of AMS by making the wild assertion that “if you do well on the constituency section you get stuffed in the list one”. At least she could try to be consistent. Does she want the results to fairly represent the voters’ choices, or not?

It is essential to understand the principle (if not the arithmetic details) on which the list MSPs are elected. A party which gains fewer seats than indicated by their proportion of the vote are awarded list seats to try to redress this unfair under-representation. It is the regional list vote that is used to determine the support each party has. We should call this the PARTY vote, since it is asking which party you wish to support for government. The constituency vote we should call the PERSON vote, since it is choosing the person to be your local constituency MSP.

The system works reasonably well to provide a rough approximation of proportionality, although in the past parties have been under-represented by as much as 3.2% or over-represented by as much as 9.5%, the latter being the SNP in 2011. The SNP has never been under-represented in the number of seats they have won at Holyrood compared to their list vote, and not since 2003 compared to their constituency vote.

READ MORE: A formal Alliance for Independence will be up and running soon

Recent polling indicates that the SNP are on track for a majority in 2021 on their own. The projection from the recent Scot Goes Pop poll is SNP 72 seats – an outright majority of 15 – plus a further five Green seats, giving a 25 pro-independence majority – provided it is not damaged by those advocating an alternative pro-independence list vote.

Those advocating such an alternative pro-independence list vote to get a large Yes majority completely fail to explain how this would bring about independence. Boris Johnson has nothing to lose by refusing a Section 30 or otherwise obstructing independence, and everything to lose by allowing a referendum. The SNP urgently need to articulate how they plan to resolve this obstacle.

Scotland will need international support both to put pressure on Westminster and to recognise an independent Scotland. Such necessary international support is somewhat less likely if a large pro-independence Holyrood majority is obtained by some “alternative vote” ruse that does not democratically reflect a similar large pro-independence opinion in the electorate. Further, it would provide the perfect excuse for Johnson to say that Holyrood is undemocratic and to reform, or even repeal, the Scotland Act, and effectively

prevent any future attempts at independence. This “alternative independence list vote” idea could be very dangerous indeed.

So the approach should be, first use your PARTY vote (aka list vote) to choose the party you wish to be in government at Holyrood, then secondly use your PERSON vote (aka constituency vote) to select the person you wish to be your local MSP.

Geoff Hobson
Kirriemuir, Angus

RUTH Wishart is a joy, a treasure and a breath of fresh air. I could so easily take up a lot more space singing her praises. Was she always so wise and open-minded? Her article on Monday will I hope add to all the others who have made the same point over the years about the wasted votes from those who follow the “both votes for SNP” advice.

The misplaced loyalty of tribal politics and a touch of arrogance may be to blame. But it is nonsensical to help parties opposed to independence gain seats in Holyrood when we can have more with us on our side.

So, a huge thanks to letters from Lee McLaughlan and Lyn Jones (June 30). But also to Steve Arnott with the exciting information in his letter of plans for an Alliance for Independence with “Max the Yes” as its aim.

We can both Max the Yes in the parliament and amongst the voters.

I would also like to see The National saying why we should be taking that road, with a simple list of reasons and hammering them home every day.

Let’s get that extra 5% in the polls this year through our work, and the extra seats in Holyrood with our common cause and sense.

Tony Martin
Together For Yes, Gullane

I CANNOT be the only voter in Scotland who would not want to vote for future five-year governance by a list of unknowns with unknown integrity, or worse, a known lack of integrity and/or views abhorrent to me, even if they are labelled as pro-indy.

The pro-Union candidates already game the electoral system/integrity and lend votes to each other, in order to deliver a variety of ConDemSlab candidates considered as having the best chance of denying seats to pro-indy parties. The limited short-term electoral gain resulting in their long-term pain/decline is now ever more evident in the polls.

Put simply, if, say the SNP managed around 54% of the vote and the Greens around 12% of the vote, then this should deliver approximately a 2/3 majority of pro-indy MSPs. Similarly, a 40% vote for the SNP and 12% vote for the Greens should produce a majority of pro-indy MSPs.

Five more years of UK of the UK Government’s continued fundamental dishonesty, ignorance, incompetence, and racist endeavours awaits. The need for new MSPs, greater MSP diversity, as well as retained MSPs’ experience, suggests to me that the general thrust of “both votes for SNP” still remains valid, perhaps now even more so.

Stephen Tingle
Greater Glasgow