Another point on AV

This has been explained elsewhere, but please remember that there is no guarantee that the winning candidate will get 50 per cent of the vote under AV.

Firstly, they're not getting worthwhile votes when they get transfers, they are getting sloppy seconds at best. Moreover, as NotoAV has outlined:

When the Yes campaign talk about AV giving MPs ’50%’ of the vote, they mean 50% of the votes still remaining in the count. Because some people’s votes will get eliminated, under AV we’ll still have MPs elected on small shares of the vote – even after cobbling together a mishmash of first, second, third or lower preferences. That’s why academic experts have said that ‘more than four out of ten’ MPs will still be elected with less than 50% support under AV.

There is a lot of drivel being talked about AV. It's not even the case that the winning candidate will necessarily get 50 per cent of the votes cast, as NotoAV also reminds us:

The Electoral Commission’s impartial information booklet also makes this clear, saying: ‘Because voters don’t have to rank all of the candidates, an election can be won under the “alternative vote” system with less than half the total votes cast.’

Maybe you think it's fair to discount the second and subsequent preferences of voters whose first choice candidates come top of the ballot. I think it's a pretty weird, shoddy and unjust way to do business.