Amelia’s Magazine | Sketchbook Pop-Up Shop: Susie (Style) Bubble Talk

Illustration courtesy of Zoë Barker

From outside, remedy the Koko in Camden looks a bit like one of those Swiss clocks – the ones where a girl in lederhosen comes out on a rail every hour to strike the chime. The bare white front façade is broken only by the large ‘KOKO’ illumination and the two doors at either edge of the building which allow the audience access to the smoking balcony, click and there’s a fair few of them pacing backwards and forwards. Imagining them as clockwork Bavarians is the kind of thing I find amusing. It passes the time, waiting in the coffee place across the road for the rain to ease and the doors to open.

Los Campesinos! are a band that I’ve had to convince myself that I actually loved, because for a while I was in denial. As far as my last.fm statistics go they’ve been my favourite band of the last 18 months, and I even found myself buying a ticket for their latest tour as soon as physically able and not really being sure why. It always felt like some kind of weirdly innocuous indulgence that support groups put out literature for – y’know, you swear it’s not a big deal, you could walk away at any second, it doesn’t control your life, etc. etc., only to wake up one morning and realise that you’re deeply addicted and in trouble. It’s frightening to realise you’ve had a new favourite band for so long and not even realised.

Illustration courtesy of Zoë Barker

Once inside the venue, I buy a drink and text my erstwhile companion, struck down with food poisoning. “I’m probably the oldest person here – where are the adults?“ I ask (and I’m only 22) – there’s a distinct whiff of Lynx in the air (at a guess: Africa). LC! are a bit of a joke to some people thanks to lead singer Gareth’s scribbled-journal lyrics, and frankly they’re right – they can be acutely embarrassing. I try to justify my love (my addiction, you could say) to my friends by being clever – they’re tongue-in-cheek, I say! The literal meaning is totally ironic, but the intent is still sincere! It never works. My first instinct, looking around the venue, is that these skinny, shy kids find Gareth endearing and sincere without any ironic pretension, which would be sweet and naïve if so. Or it could be seen as pathetic – sample lyric: “As if I walked into the room/to see my ex-girlfriend/who by the way I’m still in love with/sucking the face of some pretty boy/with my favourite band’s mostpopular song in the background/is it wrong that I can’t decide which bothers me most?” – but then ‘pathetic’ sounds so much like ‘pathos’ and I’m sure that their must be some kind of link or derivation at play there, because then there’s my excuse. The band excels at drawing out an emotional response in its audience.

As I’m trying to figure this out (I’m on my own, remember, so those kinds of thoughts are all I have to amuse myself – another excuse) the first bunch of musicians stroll on stage – it’s barely past eight, which leaves me thinking that I’ll probably be home and in slippers before eleven. But as for the band: the lead singer reminds me of Sinbad, and he starts wooping.

“Woop! … Woop! … Woop!” etc. – he’s jumped over the crowd barriers at this point, and is walking through the still-thin crowd, clearly sizing people up. Every now and again somebody will recoil, which I assume is because they assume that he’ll either a) want them to join in (poor, timid children), or b) eat their ears, because he’s mental. I think it’s hilarious. The rhythmic wooping is augmented by the rest of the band joining in with their instruments, using Sinbad as a metronome. They’re a four-piece – Sinbad, fringe girl, moustache guy, and Sweater (his sensible sky-blue knitwear is his most defining feature, I suppose) – and they blew me away. Rotating between instruments, chanting and howling, they managed to bridge the divide between danceable electro-wash that I so admire in Holy Fuck or Gang Gang Dance and the careful racket of no-wave. One tune sounded like Arcade Fire’s ‘Wake Up’ shoved backwards through a plane turbine, i.e. sort of inverted by chopping it up into small pieces and reassembled with the bass brought forward and the optimistic chants turned into these awful, angry shouts… I was a total convert. Only by cornering Sinbad in the lobby afterwards did I manage to get their name – Islet. The internet tells me they’re from Cardiff, and they don’t like the internet, they have no recordings available for streaming or purchase (except this BBC live session), they have no website, they are entirely offline. The only way to experience Islet is as a live band, so go. See them live. They kick ass.

The break between the supports is short, and next on are somewhat-hyped London duo Swanton Bombs. To be fair to them, everything I’ve heard about their album has been positive (including a review on this very site), so I’m going to chalk their disappointing live presence up as unexpected. Every song reminded me of that nasty period in the early 00s when blues-rock groups were two-a-penny, where every song could be plotted on a chart with one axis labelled “Killing Floor“, and “Hey Joe” on the other. In short – it was dull, every song sounded the same, and Blood Red Shoes do this kind of thing with much more aplomb. I drifted out towards the back of the room and then upstairs, where I could fully appreciate how atrocious the Koko’s sound quality is for anyone not on the ground near the front – it’s an embarrassment for London, really, considering how much slack the place has had to take up now that the scuffed and glorious Astoria’s gone.

The audience of kids, mostly bored by what’s happened so far (Islet’s tribal antics went down like a civil servant in Downing Street), persists in ignoring whatever’s happening on stage. They’re very clearly only here for LC!, and it’s something of a relief that they come to life when the main act eventually makes an appearance – making me reassess my earlier assumption, that they were here out of a pathetic sincerity, as completely wrong. Namely: I was being pretentious and snobbish, and these kids just like how enjoyable a band LC! are – the lyrics are just plain funny, the music just plain fun, and whilst people like me with too much time on their hands (I blame my friend standing me up and leaving me to my own interior monologue) might debate the extent to which the band take this influence, or that level of twee irony, or said indebtedness to blah blah, this is bullshit. So I forgot about all that, and started jumping about with the rest of the mosh pit.

Illustration courtesy of Zoë Barker

Gareth’s certainly a livelier presence than I expected (seeing as he can come across as a bit wet sometimes). Tonight he bounds around like an over-stimulated puppy, and keeps thanking everybody – his friends, their manager, the audience (I count seven separate breaks between songs where he thanks the fans), the venue, the tour promoter. It’s sweet. The set opens with the steamrolling “I Just Sighed. I Just Sighed, Just So You Know,” which is a bastard of a song, frankly. Their latest album is filled with these, how to say, crunchy numbers, loud and a bit ridiculous, and each one sounds like an anthem tonight – the crowd on ground alongside me is just a heaving sweaty coagulation of fists and smiles, right through the more recent tracks (“There Are Listed Building”, “A Heat Rash in the Shape of The Show Me State; Or, Letters from Me to Charlotte” (it is assumed that if you cannot abide this kind of ludicrous titling of songs then LC! are not a band for you)) to the classics of a couple of years ago (“My Year in Lists,” “This Is How You Spell ‘HAHAHA, We Destroyed the Hopes and Dreams of a Generation of Faux-Romantics’”).

One of the best things about seeing these guys live, though, was that their first album suddenly made a lot more sense. Their sound in the flesh isn’t hugely similar to their last two releases (‘We Are Beautiful, We Are Doomed’ and this year’s ‘Romance Is Boring’), which were relatively crisp and clean to the ear – live, they sound like the horrible mistake that was the David Newfeld-produced debut ‘Hold On Now, Youngster’, where the levels were all over the place and the whole thing was a sorry soppy mess of a release that would stick to a wall if it was thrown at one and would congeal into just a bloody mass of nothing at the bottom. It was poorly produced, is what I’m saying. But hearing them tonight I suddenly realise that Newfeld had captured them as they actually sound, essentially that exact kind of mop bucket softness, without edges, without any definition to grab onto. They aren’t half as exciting on there as they are here because, well, that’s the nature of live music, but I have greater respect for the Broken Social Scene producer now I can understand his Sisyphean intentions.

The highlight for most people comes towards the end, when the band crack out the song that they will presumably still be ending their sets with in middle-age – “You! Me! Dancing!” – which I detest. It’s a horrible song. I don’t know why it grates when I enjoy everything else that they do so much, but there it is. However, in the interest of balance I’ll say that this once it was awesome because, well, it was. I’d never danced to it alongside a few hundred other people before and the sensation was not, shall we say, unpleasant. When the band left the stage it was the end of their largest headline show to date – despite their quirks, their oddities, their introspection and their glee, I fully expect them to be playing even larger venues within a very short time indeed. They are the biggest and best niche group around. To hell with thought – it’s my gut that wants to see them again as soon as possible.

Illustration by Naomi Law

For the last day of  the Sketchbook Pop-Up Shop, viagra dosage Susie Bubble of Style Bubble fame gave a lecture, viagra approved bookending an event that celebrated the creative arts in a social and relaxed atmosphere complete with illustrations all over the walls. As one of the more prolific bloggers out there, healing Susie Bubble is someone I have ‘followed’ for a long time owing to her quality of photos and copy as well as her evidently well-researched posts. The Style Bubble blog started in 2006 as an outlet for Susie’s opinions, naturally developing a huge following with mentions in i-D magazine, The Financial Times and numerous awards within the blogging world in a relatively short space of time (that’s the online world for you!).
 
Susie has already written an excellent post on the ‘pop up social space’, and as the last speaker at the event ties things up quite nicely – she even featured on the cover of their very first issue. Teaching herself web coding at the age of 13, Susie was always destined to make a foray into the online world. Her blog has grown quickly over the last four years and rather than a ‘what to wear now’ site endorsing celebrity-led trends, Style Bubble is full of Susie’s musings and ideas of what she really thinks. ‘I would only stop blogging if ideas run out’, she said. Not much chance of that in London…
 
Following a few questions from the audience on branding, sponsorship and advertising it was very refreshing to hear Susie’s responses reflecting the idea that a blog should be a personal passion rather than a way to increase traffic and generate sales, as an all encompassing business or brand. ‘I don’t see what a Style Bubble app would bring to the iPad’ she reveals, and equally she doesn’t see a future or market for paid blogs. If they are controlled by the brand themselves she can see the merits, though – ‘if a brand have a blog, especially some of the more secretive design houses, it is a good idea as long as the content is interesting’.   


Illustration by Naomi Law
 
Content is key, and she advises that in order to make a mark in the blogosphere, a blog must bring something new to the table. If you are in need of some more inspiration, Susie uses The Guardian fashion pages, The Coveted, and Jak&Jil for fashion news.

She understands that fashion, especially luxury fashion, is not always ethically sound, and where ‘it is impossible to investigate every choice’ we make on clothing we must be aware of the sources of our purchases. Broad generalisations can confuse consumers; for example, not everything made in China needs to be avoided. When choosing items, Susie goes for what feels right. ‘Buying luxury clothes is selfish. I ask myself if it feels nice or looks good on me’. On her own style, she made it very clear that it’s a personal choice, but in terms of A/W10 predicitons, its ‘texture, texture, texture’! Mix it up and make it your own – for S/S go for pastels and embroidery.
 
One of the nicest elements to Susie’s character is the honesty and modesty in with which she answered the questions. The London-based blogger loves the constantly developing creativity in our city, and how there are opportunities to turn your hand to whatever you want, describing herself as a ‘fraud’ with no formal training! At the moment Susie is unsure how to progress with the blog. Now in a ‘pondering phase’, she doesn’t see herself working with a ‘team’ as it is such a personal project – just her and her handy boyfriend for the photos!
 
3 facts you might like to know:
 
1. She voted Lib Dem
2. She wears her hair up when its windy
3. She was incredibly flattered when Daphne Guinness wrote about her in the FT (who wouldn’t be?!)

 
As well as some consulting work, she has some mysterious up and coming projects, so keep an eye out…

Categories ,Bloggers, ,Blogging, ,China, ,Daphne Guinness, ,Financial Times, ,Florence Massey, ,I.D Magazine, ,Jak&Jil, ,Liberal Democrats, ,Naomi Law, ,Newburgh Street, ,Pop-up Shop, ,Sketchbook Magazine, ,Style Bubble, ,Susie Bubble, ,Texture, ,The Coveted

Similar Posts:






Amelia’s Magazine | Voting Reform: An interview with Amisha Ghadiali

Yes to Fairer Votes Vice-Chair Amisha Ghadiali wearing Ada Zanditon. Illustration by Sam Parr

On May 5th 2011, this the United Kingdom will be asked – in the first referendum since 1975 – to vote on the following question:

At present, price the UK uses the ‘first past the post’ system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the ‘alternative vote’ system be used instead?

The referendum on the Alternative Vote is the first time in our lifetimes that the citizens of the UK have been able to have a say in how we elect MP’s to the House of Commons.

Currently, viagra 100mg this historical moment to discuss voting reform – amongst a broader analysis on the current state of Britain’s democracy – is being lost amidst (speculated) Coalition tensions and fear mongering on the cost of moving from FPTP to AV. Whilst to some, AV may be “a miserable little compromise” that fails to push voting reform far enough, by voting Yes! on the 5th May we, the citizens of the UK, can register our disquiet with the current system (FPTP) and enable the discussion on voting reform to stay at the forefront of the political agenda.

To find out more about what the Alternative Vote is compared to the current system of “First Past The Post” Amelia’s Magazine interviewed one of the Yes Campaign’s Vice-Chair’s: Jewellery Designer, Ethical Fashion Campaigner and Founder of Think Act VoteAmisha Ghadiali.

Photography by Anna Gordon

What is a referendum?

A referendum is when we are asked to vote, not in an election, but on a single issue. Many of us would like to see more of these on a variety of issues. However they are not that common, the last UK-wide referendum was in 1975 asking the question “Do you think the UK should stay in the European Community (Common Market)?”

What is the Alternative Vote?

The Alternative Vote is a voting system, it means that instead of putting one X on our ballot paper, we rank our candidates in order of preference. You can rank all the candidates, or just one, it’s totally up to you. What this means is that if there are three candidates that you would be happy to represent you, you can communicate this. Or if your first choice is a smaller party, that under the current system would have little chance to getting in, you can vote for them, but also somebody from one of the main parties, without having to vote tactically.

 The person who wins the seats needs to have the majority of the vote, so what they do is count the votes. If nobody has 50% of the vote, they eliminate the candidate that comes last, and add their second preferences to the remaining candidates. This repeats until somebody has over 50% of the vote. It means that no votes are wasted.

What are the benefits to AV compared to FPTP?

The current system FPTP means that who ever gets the most votes wins. This sounds fair but what it means in reality is that 2 out of 3 MPs in our parliament have less then 50% of the vote. This means that most of us are represented by people most of us voted against.

The Alternative Vote will mean that MPs will have to be voted for by the majority in their constituency, and so will have to work harder to make sure that they are listening to all of their constituents and representing all of their views, rather then pandering to their core voter support which many of them do.

How are the ‘winners’ in FPTP Elections often opposed to by the majority of voters?

Because the candidate who gets the most votes wins, it doesn’t matter how much of the vote they got. For example some have as little as 32% of the vote in their constituency, meaning that over two thirds of their consistency didn’t vote for them.

Why are you voting Yes to AV?

I think that the Alternative Vote will make our democracy more honest, make all of our votes count, make our MPs have to work harder to gain wider support in their constituencies, make our MPs more accountable to us and make our experience of voting simpler. We will still have our one local MP, but will have more of a say on who that is.

The way that we vote is how we take part in our democracy, and so having more of a say in this part of the process is vital to making ours a fairer politics.

I believe that voting yes in this referendum is the most important vote that we have ever been asked to cast.


AV – A Historical Perspective

Why do you believe this is the most important vote we have ever been asked to cast?

I have taken part in two general elections where I know that my vote didn’t make any difference to the result. Although voting in both general and local elections is an important part of our citizenship, this is us voting on the future of our democracy. It’s the first referendum that I have ever taken part in. It’s not about party politics and politicians but about how we take part in politics and have our views represented. What could be more important than that? After all they do work for us.

What is your role within the Yes campaign?

I am a Vice-Chair of the campaign. When I thought about it over Christmas, I realised how passionately I felt about this referendum, and contacted the campaign asking if I could help. They invited me to be a Vice-Chair along with other supporters including Eddie Izzard, Martin Bell and Greg Dyke. It means that we campaign and speak out about the issues to the media and at events, and as I have discovered in the pub too!

Yes to AV illustration by Mike Harman

 What are your thoughts on how both the Yes to AV and No to AV campaigns have been run?

To be honest, I have found the whole debate in the media really depressing. The focal point often is about how it is going to affect the politicians, but this is not about them, it’s about us and our experience voting. It’s about our future, not about the present.

Of course, I am a supporter of the Yes Campaign, but feel that I would have been deeply disappointed in the No Campaign tactics even if I supported FPTP. Their campaign messages are built on actual lies, and I can’t believe that people are spending millions of pounds spreading lies, rather then on creating an honest open debate about the two systems. There has been so much ‘mud slinging’ which I find shocking, because I thought our politics was better than that.

Their three arguments are that it is expensive, it will give extremist parties (ie the BNP) more power and that it is too complicated for us to understand. None of these things are actually true. They have said it will cost £250 million which is the cost of the referendum whatever the result and the cost of counting machines that we are not getting. They have said that it will encourage the BNP, when the BNP are supporting a No vote, as they know the current system works better for them. And the idea that it is too complicated is frankly insulting. We can all count to three!

The Yes campaign has had to respond to a lot of the allegations that have been made, using time when we would have preferred to talk about relevant issues. I am really enjoying the energy of the Yes campaign, it has brought together a group of passionate, committed people from a variety of backgrounds. The local groups that have been running phone banks and doing local actions are really energetic and inspiring. 

Photography by Anna Gordon

 Why do you think the Conservatives, headed by David Cameron are campaigning against AV, though Cameron himself won the party leadership through AV?

It’s baffling isn’t it. I find it shocking that he is saying that AV is a bad system when it gave him his job. If the Conservative Party leadership deserves AV, then so should we. It is a system that is used a lot in Westminster, not just for leadership contests but also other votes such as how MPs join select committees. I think it is because this change breaks down the tribalism of the Conservatives vs Labour Party, which has served the conservative party well. I thought Cameron was more progressive, but seeing him campaign on this, my personal view is that Cameron doesn’t actually want us to have more say, he is happy with the system as it is, as it works for him.

Will AV tackle the culture of tactical voting and ‘safe seats’? Thus uprooting the current system of members of parliament being parachuted intp safe constituencies?

Yes it will. There is a website called Voter Power, where you can find out what your vote is worth with AV compared to FPTP. From their analysis AV will reduce the number of very safe seats by 60, and increase the number of very marginal seats by 44. So this will make a big difference.

Safe seats are definitely a problem in our current system, as is the fact that political parties openly target the marginal seats only. In the last election the votes of only 1.6% of the electorate in 111 of these marginal seats decided the result. This is something that we have to change.

There will be no need for tactical voting. You can vote with your real preferences, and don’t have to think about voting ‘against’ people.

Why do you think the number of people who vote at each General Election is falling? What needs to change within our political system that will encourage people to use their vote?

I think that there are many reasons why voting turnout is falling, a lack of trust in politicians, declining numbers of political party membership, the number of safe seats held by MPs, feeling that votes don’t count, as just a few. I think that people need to feel more connected to politics, and feel that their voice is really heard through voting. I think the Alternative Vote will help solve these issues. It will not solve all the ills of politics in this country, but it is a small change we can and should make for the better.

Photography by Anna Gordon

In the media there have been mutterings on both the reduction of the number of MP’s and the redrawing of constituency boundaries, what effect will this decision have on politics and what is it relation to the referendum on the alternative vote?

So it has nothing to do with the referendum. This happened earlier in the year, it was part of the same bill that the referendum was on when it went through parliament, and was not something that we had a say on. This has happened, and will take effect at the next general election. There are going to be 50 less MPs which means that some of the current boundaries will be re-drawn and made bigger. The idea is that it keeps the cost of politics down.  It has been quite controversial as they are dividing some traditional boundaries and local areas. At the same time Cameron has appointed 117 new peers in the House of Lords since last May, which is actually putting the cost of politics up despite cutting the number of MPs.

Any website or article recommendations for those interested in finding out more about the referendum?

Electoral Reform
 
Yes to Fairer Votes

Elegance Rebellion

If you get the X Factor you’ll get AV – Johann Hari

You can join the campaign on Facebook and Twitter too!

Categories ,5th May 2011, ,Amisha Ghadiali, ,Anna Gordon, ,Conservatives, ,David Cameron, ,Ed Milliband, ,FPTP, ,General Election, ,House of Commons, ,Labour, ,Liberal Democrats, ,May 5th, ,Mike Harman, ,MP, ,Nick Clegg, ,No to AV, ,Referendum, ,Sam Parr, ,Think Act Vote, ,Yes to AV, ,Yes to Fairer Votes

Similar Posts:






Amelia’s Magazine | Voting Reform: An interview with Amisha Ghadiali

Yes to Fairer Votes Vice-Chair Amisha Ghadiali wearing Ada Zanditon. Illustration by Sam Parr

On May 5th 2011, this the United Kingdom will be asked – in the first referendum since 1975 – to vote on the following question:

At present, price the UK uses the ‘first past the post’ system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the ‘alternative vote’ system be used instead?

The referendum on the Alternative Vote is the first time in our lifetimes that the citizens of the UK have been able to have a say in how we elect MP’s to the House of Commons.

Currently, viagra 100mg this historical moment to discuss voting reform – amongst a broader analysis on the current state of Britain’s democracy – is being lost amidst (speculated) Coalition tensions and fear mongering on the cost of moving from FPTP to AV. Whilst to some, AV may be “a miserable little compromise” that fails to push voting reform far enough, by voting Yes! on the 5th May we, the citizens of the UK, can register our disquiet with the current system (FPTP) and enable the discussion on voting reform to stay at the forefront of the political agenda.

To find out more about what the Alternative Vote is compared to the current system of “First Past The Post” Amelia’s Magazine interviewed one of the Yes Campaign’s Vice-Chair’s: Jewellery Designer, Ethical Fashion Campaigner and Founder of Think Act VoteAmisha Ghadiali.

Photography by Anna Gordon

What is a referendum?

A referendum is when we are asked to vote, not in an election, but on a single issue. Many of us would like to see more of these on a variety of issues. However they are not that common, the last UK-wide referendum was in 1975 asking the question “Do you think the UK should stay in the European Community (Common Market)?”

What is the Alternative Vote?

The Alternative Vote is a voting system, it means that instead of putting one X on our ballot paper, we rank our candidates in order of preference. You can rank all the candidates, or just one, it’s totally up to you. What this means is that if there are three candidates that you would be happy to represent you, you can communicate this. Or if your first choice is a smaller party, that under the current system would have little chance to getting in, you can vote for them, but also somebody from one of the main parties, without having to vote tactically.

 The person who wins the seats needs to have the majority of the vote, so what they do is count the votes. If nobody has 50% of the vote, they eliminate the candidate that comes last, and add their second preferences to the remaining candidates. This repeats until somebody has over 50% of the vote. It means that no votes are wasted.

What are the benefits to AV compared to FPTP?

The current system FPTP means that who ever gets the most votes wins. This sounds fair but what it means in reality is that 2 out of 3 MPs in our parliament have less then 50% of the vote. This means that most of us are represented by people most of us voted against.

The Alternative Vote will mean that MPs will have to be voted for by the majority in their constituency, and so will have to work harder to make sure that they are listening to all of their constituents and representing all of their views, rather then pandering to their core voter support which many of them do.

How are the ‘winners’ in FPTP Elections often opposed to by the majority of voters?

Because the candidate who gets the most votes wins, it doesn’t matter how much of the vote they got. For example some have as little as 32% of the vote in their constituency, meaning that over two thirds of their consistency didn’t vote for them.

Why are you voting Yes to AV?

I think that the Alternative Vote will make our democracy more honest, make all of our votes count, make our MPs have to work harder to gain wider support in their constituencies, make our MPs more accountable to us and make our experience of voting simpler. We will still have our one local MP, but will have more of a say on who that is.

The way that we vote is how we take part in our democracy, and so having more of a say in this part of the process is vital to making ours a fairer politics.

I believe that voting yes in this referendum is the most important vote that we have ever been asked to cast.


AV – A Historical Perspective

Why do you believe this is the most important vote we have ever been asked to cast?

I have taken part in two general elections where I know that my vote didn’t make any difference to the result. Although voting in both general and local elections is an important part of our citizenship, this is us voting on the future of our democracy. It’s the first referendum that I have ever taken part in. It’s not about party politics and politicians but about how we take part in politics and have our views represented. What could be more important than that? After all they do work for us.

What is your role within the Yes campaign?

I am a Vice-Chair of the campaign. When I thought about it over Christmas, I realised how passionately I felt about this referendum, and contacted the campaign asking if I could help. They invited me to be a Vice-Chair along with other supporters including Eddie Izzard, Martin Bell and Greg Dyke. It means that we campaign and speak out about the issues to the media and at events, and as I have discovered in the pub too!

Yes to AV illustration by Mike Harman

 What are your thoughts on how both the Yes to AV and No to AV campaigns have been run?

To be honest, I have found the whole debate in the media really depressing. The focal point often is about how it is going to affect the politicians, but this is not about them, it’s about us and our experience voting. It’s about our future, not about the present.

Of course, I am a supporter of the Yes Campaign, but feel that I would have been deeply disappointed in the No Campaign tactics even if I supported FPTP. Their campaign messages are built on actual lies, and I can’t believe that people are spending millions of pounds spreading lies, rather then on creating an honest open debate about the two systems. There has been so much ‘mud slinging’ which I find shocking, because I thought our politics was better than that.

Their three arguments are that it is expensive, it will give extremist parties (ie the BNP) more power and that it is too complicated for us to understand. None of these things are actually true. They have said it will cost £250 million which is the cost of the referendum whatever the result and the cost of counting machines that we are not getting. They have said that it will encourage the BNP, when the BNP are supporting a No vote, as they know the current system works better for them. And the idea that it is too complicated is frankly insulting. We can all count to three!

The Yes campaign has had to respond to a lot of the allegations that have been made, using time when we would have preferred to talk about relevant issues. I am really enjoying the energy of the Yes campaign, it has brought together a group of passionate, committed people from a variety of backgrounds. The local groups that have been running phone banks and doing local actions are really energetic and inspiring. 

Photography by Anna Gordon

 Why do you think the Conservatives, headed by David Cameron are campaigning against AV, though Cameron himself won the party leadership through AV?

It’s baffling isn’t it. I find it shocking that he is saying that AV is a bad system when it gave him his job. If the Conservative Party leadership deserves AV, then so should we. It is a system that is used a lot in Westminster, not just for leadership contests but also other votes such as how MPs join select committees. I think it is because this change breaks down the tribalism of the Conservatives vs Labour Party, which has served the conservative party well. I thought Cameron was more progressive, but seeing him campaign on this, my personal view is that Cameron doesn’t actually want us to have more say, he is happy with the system as it is, as it works for him.

Will AV tackle the culture of tactical voting and ‘safe seats’? Thus uprooting the current system of members of parliament being parachuted intp safe constituencies?

Yes it will. There is a website called Voter Power, where you can find out what your vote is worth with AV compared to FPTP. From their analysis AV will reduce the number of very safe seats by 60, and increase the number of very marginal seats by 44. So this will make a big difference.

Safe seats are definitely a problem in our current system, as is the fact that political parties openly target the marginal seats only. In the last election the votes of only 1.6% of the electorate in 111 of these marginal seats decided the result. This is something that we have to change.

There will be no need for tactical voting. You can vote with your real preferences, and don’t have to think about voting ‘against’ people.

Why do you think the number of people who vote at each General Election is falling? What needs to change within our political system that will encourage people to use their vote?

I think that there are many reasons why voting turnout is falling, a lack of trust in politicians, declining numbers of political party membership, the number of safe seats held by MPs, feeling that votes don’t count, as just a few. I think that people need to feel more connected to politics, and feel that their voice is really heard through voting. I think the Alternative Vote will help solve these issues. It will not solve all the ills of politics in this country, but it is a small change we can and should make for the better.

Photography by Anna Gordon

In the media there have been mutterings on both the reduction of the number of MP’s and the redrawing of constituency boundaries, what effect will this decision have on politics and what is it relation to the referendum on the alternative vote?

So it has nothing to do with the referendum. This happened earlier in the year, it was part of the same bill that the referendum was on when it went through parliament, and was not something that we had a say on. This has happened, and will take effect at the next general election. There are going to be 50 less MPs which means that some of the current boundaries will be re-drawn and made bigger. The idea is that it keeps the cost of politics down.  It has been quite controversial as they are dividing some traditional boundaries and local areas. At the same time Cameron has appointed 117 new peers in the House of Lords since last May, which is actually putting the cost of politics up despite cutting the number of MPs.

Any website or article recommendations for those interested in finding out more about the referendum?

Electoral Reform
 
Yes to Fairer Votes

Elegance Rebellion

If you get the X Factor you’ll get AV – Johann Hari

You can join the campaign on Facebook and Twitter too!

Categories ,5th May 2011, ,Amisha Ghadiali, ,Anna Gordon, ,Conservatives, ,David Cameron, ,Ed Milliband, ,FPTP, ,General Election, ,House of Commons, ,Labour, ,Liberal Democrats, ,May 5th, ,Mike Harman, ,MP, ,Nick Clegg, ,No to AV, ,Referendum, ,Sam Parr, ,Think Act Vote, ,Yes to AV, ,Yes to Fairer Votes

Similar Posts: