HAVING listened to the various arguments regarding alternative voting, far from being a fairer system as those promoting it claim, it is in fact a more unfair way of deciding an election as the following possible scenario shows.

Assume a situation where an election is called and there are four candidates.

Elector one decides on his first choice, but feels that the policies of the remaining three candidates are such that he feels that he would be unable to consider any suitable to receive his vote.

Elector two also casts his vote for his preferred candidate and feels that he could accept the policies of the other candidates and ranks them in order of preference. This is where the anomaly occurs, as elector two has four votes to elector one’s one, which is surely undemocratic.

Those who favour AV no doubt would argue that elector one had the opportunity to case four votes, but, if to qualify one has to vote for people or policies which one does not agree with is a travesty of natural justice.

The only possible way of resolving this anomaly would be that elector one should be able, if he feels unable to accept the policies of the remaining candidates is for him to be able to cast his remaining votes for his preferred candidate.

Unless this was allowed under AV, any result would be completely unfair, and an affront to the democratic system. Although the present system may not be perfect, at least it is fair, with everyone able to case one vote.

CE RICHARDS, Oakbury Drive, Overcombe