|
|
Post by kvasir on Sept 20, 2018 1:01:04 GMT
Theoretically if the number of signatures had been kept on a running tally people would have seen it was close and have would have been more encouraged to go and sign.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823 
|
Post by timmullen1 on Sept 20, 2018 1:50:29 GMT
Theoretically if the number of signatures had been kept on a running tally people would have seen it was close and have would have been more encouraged to go and sign. I suspect the bigger problem was it’s such a DUP stronghold none of the other Parties have a strong ground organisation; looking at the #AwakeForPaisley hashtag on Twitter it seems even Sinn Fèin were relying on people from outside the area, and the other Unionist Parties seem to have been conspicuous by their absence. There are probably a lot of ifs, buts and maybes, but perhaps only having three signing centres out of a possible ten in a predominantly rural constituency also contributed to the recall falling short. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2018 4:17:59 GMT
Breaking: Chief electoral officer Virginia McVea: 7,099 votes. There will not be a North Antrim by-election. Threshold was 7,543. ****ing hell. |
|
middyman
Conservative
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Posts: 8,050
|
Post by middyman on Sept 20, 2018 6:57:22 GMT
Perhaps they should have another vote to see if any voters have changed their minds.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Sept 20, 2018 7:36:06 GMT
Excellent news.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 20, 2018 7:42:18 GMT
Perhaps they should have another vote to see if any voters have changed their minds. When I read the rules of the petition, thinking that I could mention it on a group I run online, the bit that scared me witless was the suggestion that any reporting (even mentioning that it had started) was liable to be construed as a crime and end up with me in jail. Therefore I think that certainly a review of the running could be argued for asking "Should the whole process be kept secret, or could there be a weekly reminder that a petition is being held in the same view as election reporting?" (i.e "A recall petition is being held in the North Antrim constituency. Electors in the constituency have until (date of closing) to sign stating that they wish to see a by-election in the constituency") |
|
middyman
Conservative
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Posts: 8,050
|
Post by middyman on Sept 20, 2018 9:05:46 GMT
Perhaps they should have another vote to see if any voters have changed their minds. When I read the rules of the petition, thinking that I could mention it on a group I run online, the bit that scared me witless was the suggestion that any reporting (even mentioning that it had started) was liable to be construed as a crime and end up with me in jail. Therefore I think that certainly a review of the running could be argued for asking "Should the whole process be kept secret, or could there be a weekly reminder that a petition is being held in the same view as election reporting?" (i.e "A recall petition is being held in the North Antrim constituency. Electors in the constituency have until (date of closing) to sign stating that they wish to see a by-election in the constituency") My post wasn’t actually a comment on North Antrim. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 20, 2018 9:22:10 GMT
Regardless of whether you actually wanted a recall election or not, it surely can't be good that there was so little transparency. (if the argument is that we shouldn't have this provision at all, then I can actually sympathise - but if we are going to do it, at least lets do it properly) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2018 10:26:21 GMT
Perhaps they should have another vote to see if any voters have changed their minds. I'm quite sure that the voters will be given another chance to oust Paisley if they so wish to in the near future (May 2022 at the latest). |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 20, 2018 10:48:02 GMT
By that logic, Remain had the support of 63.5% of the electorate. Apathy, apathy ... oh I can't be bothe.. |
|
|
|
Post by thirdchill on Sept 20, 2018 10:59:48 GMT
Regardless of whether you actually wanted a recall election or not, it surely can't be good that there was so little transparency. (if the argument is that we shouldn't have this provision at all, then I can actually sympathise - but if we are going to do it, at least lets do it properly) As this was a recall petition rather than a by-election or other election, we need to be careful with regards to anything that might artificially increase or decrease turnout. Maybe having a few more places available for petition signing would be helpful, but that's as far as it should go. The publicity should only go as far as making people aware that this petition is available and where they can sign. No more than this. Any attempt to get people to actually sign should be left to political parties and/or other campaigners. No neutral body should be involved in that side of things. However, I am still opposed to the whole thing. Different punishments for different MPs for the same transgression(s) is not a good thing. Am pretty sure this would have got through in a more marginal NI constituency (e.g. Belfast South). |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 20, 2018 11:03:28 GMT
^^^This last paragraph. Exactly.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Sept 20, 2018 11:37:23 GMT
It is difficult to analyse this when there is a sample size of only 1. If and when there have been 8 or 10 such petitions, there will have been variety of different numbers of signing locations available, a variety of reasons for the petitions, and possibly different amounts of publicity for each one.
I guess that the question of whether people decided to sign the petition did not depend on the seriousness of the circumstances which initiated the petition. I have been thinking if it had related to Croydon Central, I wouldn't have signed it - because I don't want there to be a by-election, regardless of whatever hypothetical circumstances existed.
I also think that this whole thing has gone way over the heads of most ordinary people, and that only we anoraks and politicos are aware of it at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2018 11:41:20 GMT
90% not signing the petition and 90% support isnt quite the same |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2018 12:04:26 GMT
I also think that this whole thing has gone way over the heads of most ordinary people, and that only we anoraks and politicos are aware of it at all. This is perhaps the one thing we can all agree on. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 20, 2018 13:50:31 GMT
I predict that the number will be way below the threshold. Good prediction. |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Sept 20, 2018 13:56:46 GMT
I wouldn't say it was "way below" the threshold, 9.4% was pretty close actually.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 20, 2018 14:03:18 GMT
Maybe voters decided to save money. A by-election would have cost tens of thousands of pounds and the result would have been an easy DUP hold.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,908
|
Post by YL on Sept 20, 2018 14:15:21 GMT
I'm not surprised this didn't pass. It always seemed to me that getting 10% of the electorate to go out of their way to call for a by-election that was unlikely to lead to the seat actually changing hands was going to be a struggle. That it got so close suggests that in more competitive constituencies these are quite likely to pass. A question (perhaps for Davıd Boothroyd): how many cases have there been in recent years (say this century) where this procedure would have been triggered had it existed and the MP did not resign? |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Sept 20, 2018 15:09:54 GMT
Since the Standards and Privileges Committee was set up, the following MPs would have been eligible for a recall petition if the legislation had been in place.
1999 - Ernie Ross (Lab, Dundee West) - 10 sitting days - leaking select committee report
2000 - Teresa Gorman (Con, Billericay) - 1 month - non disclosure of interests
2001 - Geoffrey Robinson (Lab, Coventry North West) - 3 weeks - non disclosure of interests
2002 - Keith Vaz (Lab, Leicester East) - 1 month - breaches of code of conduct & contempt of the House
2003 - Michael Trend (Con, Windsor) - 2 weeks - misuse of additional costs allowance
2005 - Jonathan Sayeed (Con, Mid Bedfordshire) - 2 weeks - misuse of access to the House
2007 - George Galloway (Resp, Bethnal Green & Bow) - 18 sitting days - non disclosure of interests
2008 - Derek Conway (Con, Old Bexley and Sidcup) - 10 sitting days - employment of family members
2018 - Ian Paisley (DUP, North Antrim) - 30 sitting days - non disclosure of interests
In most cases I imagine that even if a recall petition had been successful, the member concerned would have been re-elected anyway as long as the party continued to support them. The most interesting one would have been Bethnal Green & Bow - I am sure the petition would be successful. Blair had just resigned so I suspect Labour would have won the by-election in the Brown honeymoon period.
|
|
