Here it is..
And in 100 seconds in could hardly make the case more fairly and more coherently.
The problem I have at the moment is my friend Nick.
He thinks AV is too complicated.
He doesn't have any problem gtting his head around it himself. He understands the argument perfectly.
He isn't one of those people who get it themselves but think its too complicated for others to understand. He thinks pretty much anyone can get their head around the notion of 1,2,3...
He just thinks we're overcomplicating a problem that doesn't need overcomplicating.(And to be fair I think you'd have to be pretty into politics to read this piece, let alone get shouty about it). That the only people exercised by all this are political types like me, who take an avid interst in this stuff. That we have had fair (if at times, incompetent) governence since FPTP was invented, and we're motivated by self interest, not by fairer votes (he thinks the self interest accusation applies on both sides).
So Nick - who has a fairly jaundiced view of national politicians - is disinclined to feed our own navel gazing by engaging in an intelletual debate about the merits of AV.
He just wants better politics and better politicians. And he does't think Yes to Av is going to give that to him.
Which is ironic really when the YES side has had non politicos at the forefront of the campaign. And the No side had had David Cameron and John Prescott.
So I'm going to spend the next two days telling people that if they want better politicians and better national governence,then the old way of voting isn't going to deliver it.
They need a new system.
They should vote YES to AV.