Grab and change it, it's yours

[venta]

Does anyone know what the actual text which is actually going to appear on the actual ballot papers on May 5th is? A bit of googling hasn't turned up any results for me, but the pages I was finding suggest to me that I may have been going about my searching in the wrong way.

I'm kind of assuming that the ballot paper will look broadly like this:

[Poll #1729575]

Now, lots of campaigners would have you believe that this is analogous to:

[Poll #1729576]

And lots of other campaigners would have you believe it's analogous to:

[Poll #1729577]

You'll notice that the second two polls allow the results to be interpreted as pol(l)ar opposites.

So, does anyone know exactly what the question is? More to the point, has the government made any commitment at all about what they're going to do with the results, how they'll be interpreted, or whether Cameron will (in fact) go "oh, that's nice" and carry on regardless with the existing system?

Comments

[shrydar.livejournal.com]

We've had preferential voting in Australia since 1918.

My own argument for not reducing the value of the transfers is that it's all about allowing you to say what you mean without having to resort to strategic voting and second guessing the rest of your electoral division; when I was living Oop North I'd vote Labour instead of Lib Dem because I knew that the latter wouldn't have been an effective vote against the Conservative party. (apologies if I've misremembered the names or spellings of the parties - I de-emigrated in '04).

AV means I could vote Lib Dem first to express my preferred result, without wasting my vote if I'm in a seat where they've very little chance of being one of the two frontrunners.

[cardinalsin.livejournal.com]

This would have been my argument too.