Forget for a moment all the points being made by the No campaign, about the estimated high costs of AV and all the debate about One Person, One Vote. Let’s for a moment imagine that the Yes campaign wins, and the next General Election in the UK uses AV. If this happens, there are two possible scenarios when it comes to the outcome:

1. The outcome of the election is the same as it would have been under the current system, ie the same party or parties end up in power.

2. AV changes the outcome of the election. The two big parties lose votes at the expense of the others, meaning a much higher chance of another coalition government.

Neither is good for the country. If changing the voting system has little or no impact on the result, as various research has suggested (including the BBC and LSE), then why spend public money on changing the voting system? Counting the vote under AV will invariably take longer, thereby costing more than the current system. With cuts being made left, right and centre (no pun intended), surely the funds could be better channelled into schools, hospitals and the like?

Update: @halfmanhalfwit on Twitter made the point that counters get a flat fee no matter how long the vote count takes. A valid point. However, there will invariably be other administrative costs involved with changing a voting system on this scale. There will surely also be a big educational advertising campaign required come the next election to remind voters how it works. But this doesn’t alter the point that if the outcomes of future elections are the same under AV as under the current system, we’d be changing the system for the sake of changing it, not because it’s going to lead to more accountable governments.

But let’s say AV does alter the outcomes of our General Elections, leading to more coalition governments. This too is a bad thing – when parties enter into a coalition, they necessarily have to make compromises and go back on election manifesto pledges. The stark reality of this was shown when key Lib Dems recently backed plans to increase university tuition fees, despite having said they would scrap them in their 2010 General Election manifesto. More coalitions in the future would lead to more such situations, from all parties involved. It means that parties will be able to promise things in their manifestos that they know they can’t or won’t deliver – and they’ll be able to blame the failure on the fact that they were part of a coalition. The manifestos won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on.

The current system has largely led to single-party governments, which means you know what you’ll get from the party that wins, and it’s easier to hold the government to account. There’s no hiding for MPs whose parties don’t deliver on manifesto promises; they can – and do – get voted out.

So there you have it – neither possible consequence of a Yes vote is good for Britain. Vote No to AV on May 5th.

To set the scene, the main part of the building is a supermarket car park, and it’s surrounded by a few shops, a brasserie and some regular market stalls. A farmer’s market and other events are held in the station, too.

Aside from the car park, this is all great. But why stop there? On a rainy day like today, Bath is crying out for a covered shopping and entertainment venue, where people could dive inside when the heavens open and spend some time looking around. Bristol has Broadmead and Cabot Circus, and nearby towns such as Swindon have indoor destinations to attract people, whatever the weather. Now I’m not suggesting Green Park Station be filled up with chain shops. Instead, it’s the perfect place for more local businesses to trade. Let’s have more market stalls, some little shops and eateries. But above all, get rid of the car park! It’s a horrible waste of a great piece of architecture.

To get a feel for what Green Park Station could be, have a look at what they’ve done in Windsor. Its mostly-disused central station has been transformed into the trendy Windsor Royal Shopping centre.

A combination of the internet and the roll-out of digital TV has seen teletext’s prominence decline, but believe it or not, it’s still there, resolutely soldiering on, quietly doing what it’s done so well for years. A credit to those who have maintained it for all these years.

In the days before the internet, teletext was your first port of call for everything from news and sport to flight arrival information. A day didn’t go by when I wouldn’t flick onto BBC Ceefax page 302 to catch up on what was happening in the football world, or to monitor the latest scores, the goals being posted as they went in. Just a few weeks ago, when I was at my gran’s house with no internet access, I turned back the years to check how my team was doing on teletext.

Yes its interface may have been grounded in old green-on-black computer monitors that have long been sent to the tip, but it was teletext’s raw simplicity and ease of use that made it so great. Easy to read, straightforward to navigate, and kept up to date, it provided so many with a service like nothing else that was available at the time. A sort of Web 1.0 on your TV, if you like.

So as it quietly makes its exit to the history books, teletext can do so with dignity, knowing it has put in an absolutely sterling shift.

Image from wwward0.

This low price begs two questions: first, how on earth can Sainsbury’s make any profit whatsoever on it, and second, more importantly, what does it taste like?

While big firms can achieve economies of scale that smaller ones can only dream about, when you consider all the costs involved in making that curry, packaging it, transporting it and putting it on the shelf, 4p seems ridiculously cheap. Not that we should complain, of course.

Crucially, though, does it taste good? The list of ingredients suggests it should, but I’ve not tried it, so couldn’t comment. There’s a Facebook appreciation group been set up, but it has a rather modest member count – 29 at the time of writing.

Has anyone else tried it? Post your comments here if you have…

I’ll try to post random thoughts and observations, some related to the West Country and others not, as and when. The first, in fact, will be in a few minutes…

Almost every show, he comes up with some gushing praise for one of the contestants, finishing off by saying something along the lines of “a hundred and fifty per cent yes” or even “a million per cent yes”.

Now last I heard, per cent stands for ‘per 100′ (cent, being French for one hundred). So you can’t have 150 per 100, it just doesn’t work – all it does is make Mr Walsh look a bit silly.

As I now complete my time at City University and prepare to leave the bright lights for a job in the west country, I feel that the title of this blog ought to change to reflect this.

Over the coming months I will consider how I will do this, and what the focus of the blog will be. Watch this space.

This made the two security guards who I had to deal with whilst entering Portcullis House the other day stand out, but not in a good way.

Portcullis House

Firstly, when I went to the front of a queue of people waiting outside to ask how to get in, the first guard said: “Yes, there’s a queue of people here.” Fine, I had to join it, no problem. Only then, as I turned away, he decided to add: “Haven’t you ever heard of queuing before?” Now why on earth was that comment necessary?A few minutes later, it became obvious that he wasn’t the only one there with a degree in rudeness. As I emptied my pockets into the basket for the security check, I automatically went to take my belt off – as experience told me that it would set off the metal detector. Yet as I was doing this, a different guard barked at me “No, I said pockets huh”. Again, rude and totally unnecessary.

Bearing in mind that these are the first people that many will meet as they enter Portcullis House, they have a responsibility to uphold the image of this country. Rudeness has no place anywhere, but especially not from those ultimately in the pay of the people.

Image thanks to qatsi.

Only it isn’t always as simple as it seems, as this photo, taken near King’s Cross shows…

Which way is left?