Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
John Humphries is the top BBC interviewer, what some called their 'lead interviewer'....
Normally he is well briefed and very formidable but in an interview today with David Cameron he became completely unstuck. He showed how complex AV was and how he did not understand it and he also got his facts wrong over FPTP.
It is a rarity that Humphries gets trashed like this and we should ask if he is losing his touch!
Here is a transcript I found of his interview with DC. Can't find an audio link, yet, if I do I will post one but for now here is the transcript.
---
DC: If you go to an AV system you start counting some people's votes more than once. And you end up, in the words of Churchill...
JH: No you don't. It simply isn't true that you count votes more than once.
DC: Yes, you count all the votes. You start eliminating candidates, and you count people's second preferences.
JH: And I have a second preference, as well as you, as well as anyone else. So you don't count some people's votes more than others. [laughing gently at absurdity of proposition]
DC: Actually, John, you're wrong. completely wrong. That is not the way it works. It's complicated...
JH: No it's isn't! It's terribly simple.
DC: If you vote for a Labour candidate and I vote for a Monster Raving Looney candidate and he comes last...
JH: He drops out! Monster Raving Looney has gone.
DC: And my second preference vote is counted
JH: So is mine!
DC: It isn't! It isn't! That's where you're wrong, That's quite worrying if the lead broadcaster on the BBC doesn't understand the system.
JH: It's even more worrying that the Prime Minister is scaring people...
DC: You don't understand the system that you're meant to be explaining to the public. Back to school.
JH: I'll go back to school and I'll choose my teacher.
DC: Why would you want to give up [FPTP] to adopt a voting system that's only used by three countries in the world?
JH: As opposed to a voting system that's used by no other major democracy...
DC: Try America.
JH: They have primaries in the United States.
DC: We now have primaries in many constituencies in the UK. Again I find it staggering that the lead broadcaster in the BBC thinks our system is not used anywhere else in the world. You've got to change your briefer. Our system is used by half the voters in the world, John. I am absolutely staggered.
-----
There it is Humphries really did blow that interview.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
not surprised by john humphries being bemused the stories being put around about how a.v. works would confuse and frighten anyone. incidentally had a letter from the "no" campaign but nothing from the "yes" campaign. the letter tries to frighten people by intimating that the bnp would benefit from a change. absolute nonsense of course as they are supprting the "no" campaign.
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
Sorry Barry,
I think you desire to spin any Cameron/Tory action into a positive has taken a leap to far here. the interview can be heard at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b010vy93 - set the timer to 2 hrs 10 minutes to get the crucial bit of the programme. Cameron was evasive, refusing to condemn the no campaign inflammatory claim that AV would result in the deaths of babies and under equipped troops in Afghanistan and came across as someone primed to bolster his own policies as "robust" and to try and deflect attention away from his own gaps by using the "lead broadcaster" comment in a disparaging way.
John Humphries has been better but it is clear that Cameron has had his media training and knows how to stonewall.
I would think it's just not interesting or engaging to the average member of the electorate and will have a negative affect on turnout; that would suit Cameron and his cronies so perhaps it was intentional on his part.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
Mark
Hopefully that should make your link live
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b010vy93 Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
Thanks Marek. Must get the hang of this interwebby stuff!
If we asked serious questions about capability after one mistake we'd have nobody in Government..........
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Mark - that of course is a bit of spin yourself of course.
Back to the specific point I raised about AV - I note that you have not challenged the transcript and that tells a story in itself without the need for any kind of spin.
By the way - the adopton of AV cannot but help to cost more to count however you like to spin it. Every constituency that does not see a clear winner with 50% of the vote would then move into a second and in most cases further elimination counts wheras under FPTP the count would be over done and dusted. The extra counting time has to be paid for (with or without the counting machine cost that, if bought, may speed it up). As money cannot be spent twice then there are financial consequences to that.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barryw,as i've said so the av vote is ok for party leaders but not ok for electin mp's.
There are always financial consequences. Are you saying there is a price ceiling on democracy?
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
The cost of staging the referendun is estimated roughly at a £100 million and should it be adopted a further £150 million will be required for the machinery etc.
What price democracy eh? Glad we are all tightening our belts!
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
Barry
spin or balance? I am not disagreeing with the transcript just the context in which it is used here. When heard in full the interview is certainly not illuminating of the debate but neither is it a 'trashing' of John Humphrys.
I see that the Electoral Commission says it has no plans to buy counting machines (FT 1st May) so is there even a story here? The costs of the referendum have been minimised by holding it on the same day as the elections so, apart from not holding it, it would seem that costs have been minimised.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
I could not get anywhere with that link. This one should be OK. Check things at 08:10am
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/listen_again/default.stmIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
P.S.
AV is discussed at 7mins 45 secs in.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#11 Mark it is the cost of elections not the referendum that is the No vote case and if counting machines were bought then it would be the local authorities that would buy them though I understand they might be able to reclaim the cash from HMG.
Brian - what Party leaders get elected by AV? none as far as I know. One of the Yes campaign's big lies relates to the election of Conservative Leader but that has been shown up as the lie that it is so you cant be talking about that.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
AV is sure to bankrupt the country if the counting machines were to be made of gold and studded with diamonds and we were each given a set of solid silver voting pens, a different colour for each option;1,2.3 etc.
Then the taxis we would all expect to arrive at our door to take us, we renewed democrats,to our hallowed duty.
If...
Steady Barry, there is clever and there is 'clever'.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
ok lets vote yes go bankrupt and have a double ression for starters,and then wot next.
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Ed Milliband was elected by a form of AV, with the possibility of someone having 3 votes (or possibly even more) and 5 candidates, so if someone who was an MP/MEP, party member and union member voted for candidates in the reverse order of final popularity their votes would be counted 15 times.
Full results here, would someone like to precis in less words than Vic's UKIP thread
http://www.labour.org.uk/votes-by-roundDT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
I think Mr Cameron should have perhaps have distinguished between 'included' and 'counted' as the process of the first count determines the inclusion of any subsequent counts. Ultimately anything not included gets 'discounted'. So on the same merit a vote only gets counted once.
I still find it a worry he refers to it as 'complicated'.
He is trying to impose the concept of FPTP onto AV, to make it seem unfair...let's hope that this is intentional! I hope no babies die as a result and we find out those 8 anonymous supporters of the 'No' campaign.
That being said I don't think it will get voted in, but then that's democracy. We will also get the democratic input of those that vote for Vic. Which will be nice.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
rather different issue, the electoral college that the reds use is unbearably complicated.
the blues have a more simpler way with a.v. to elect their leader.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
I think the best we can get from this interview is that John Humphries was not up to the intellect of Mr Cameron and Mr Cameron does not like AV...or perhaps finds it too complicated. In which case Mr Cameron may consider the post of 'lead interviewer' for the BBC.