|
|
Post by greenhert on Nov 21, 2023 21:41:58 GMT
The reason why the number of nominations for local elections has gone down to 2 instead of 10 is because of the pandemic. The reason it hasn’t gone up to 10 again after the pandemic is because there hasn’t been a corresponding increase in the number of minor or frivolous candidates. In parliamentary elections there has been. Who defines "frivolous"? Who gets to decide who defines "frivolous"? Who gets to decide who gets to decide who gets to define "frivolous"? Who gets to decide who gets to decide who gets to decide who gets to define "frivolous"? Exactly the sort of questions pointed out when the High Court of Canada abolished the requirement for candidates in Canadian ridings to pay deposits. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Nov 21, 2023 21:51:45 GMT
Election deposits do not solve this problem. Instead we need to scrap the deposit entirely (Ireland scrapped it for the most part; only Independent candidates who cannot find 30 assentors have to pay it nowadays) and impose tougher signature requirements, e.g. increasing the requirement for nomination from 10 signatures to 100. On the contrary I opt for much high deposits and to abandon the absurdity of the silly hurdle of assentors who add nothing and protect from nothing. Assentors prove that at least a representative of your candidature has actually been out and connected with some voters in the locality and that you're not just turning up at the Electoral Services office (which may not even be in the constituency) to lodge some paperwork and money. The effort threshold is clear and in very high profile contests it does seem to make a difference. Do you honestly think we'd have had all those mayoral candidates in 2021 with the normal requirements? |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Nov 21, 2023 22:09:56 GMT
On the contrary I opt for much high deposits and to abandon the absurdity of the silly hurdle of assentors who add nothing and protect from nothing. Assentors prove that at least a representative of your candidature has actually been out and connected with some voters in the locality and that you're not just turning up at the Electoral Services office (which may not even be in the constituency) to lodge some paperwork and money. The effort threshold is clear and in very high profile contests it does seem to make a difference. Do you honestly think we'd have had all those mayoral candidates in 2021 with the normal requirements? Getting the signatures is the hardest part of the process. In a dead ward, almost impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 21, 2023 22:12:32 GMT
On the contrary I opt for much high deposits and to abandon the absurdity of the silly hurdle of assentors who add nothing and protect from nothing. Assentors prove that at least a representative of your candidature has actually been out and connected with some voters in the locality and that you're not just turning up at the Electoral Services office (which may not even be in the constituency) to lodge some paperwork and money. The effort threshold is clear and in very high profile contests it does seem to make a difference. Do you honestly think we'd have had all those mayoral candidates in 2021 with the normal requirements? But turned out and made an effort for what possible actual purpose? To satisfy some daft arcane imposed rule that signifies nothing at all other than knocking on doors? If the assentor had to independently go into the registration office and swear an oath that he has known the candidate for over 3-years and believes him to be sensible, educated and of good character, suitable to the office of a representative and to sign a document to that effect in front of witnesses and at cost of a £10 swear fee, I might support it. But I prefer a large deposit that is returned on gaining 10% (no damned sliding scale : you satisfy it or you fail and pay) of the poll or more. I am happy to consider bail bonds for the deposit that are only 'called upon' if the 10% minimum is not satisfied and the candidate/party cannot or will not pay when called upon to do so. There are too many frivolous candidates and just too many candidates altogether. Few seats ever have more than 3-serious contenders. Elections are about representation of the people and winners, not about minor party aspirations and jockying for a stronger 4th place. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 21, 2023 22:17:08 GMT
Assentors prove that at least a representative of your candidature has actually been out and connected with some voters in the locality and that you're not just turning up at the Electoral Services office (which may not even be in the constituency) to lodge some paperwork and money. The effort threshold is clear and in very high profile contests it does seem to make a difference. Do you honestly think we'd have had all those mayoral candidates in 2021 with the normal requirements? Getting the signatures is the hardest part of the process. In a dead ward, almost impossible. A 'dead ward' ? |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 21, 2023 22:18:46 GMT
Getting the signatures is the hardest part of the process. In a dead ward, almost impossible. A 'dead ward' ? It is a stage that some of them go through. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Nov 21, 2023 22:41:07 GMT
Assentors prove that at least a representative of your candidature has actually been out and connected with some voters in the locality and that you're not just turning up at the Electoral Services office (which may not even be in the constituency) to lodge some paperwork and money. The effort threshold is clear and in very high profile contests it does seem to make a difference. Do you honestly think we'd have had all those mayoral candidates in 2021 with the normal requirements? Getting the signatures is the hardest part of the process. In a dead ward, almost impossible. What's a dead ward? |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Nov 21, 2023 22:43:21 GMT
Getting the signatures is the hardest part of the process. In a dead ward, almost impossible. A 'dead ward' ? Weren't they those 2 talentless lads who were on X-Factor or something?! |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Nov 21, 2023 22:45:48 GMT
FWIW I very much enjoy what I consider a great British tradition of "eccentric" candidates standing in our election process. How much duller would elections have been without the David Sutch's, Count Binface's and Miss Whiplash's of this world?  |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Nov 21, 2023 23:01:21 GMT
I used to be so wedded and stuck to £500/5%. Can't deny that £500 being the case for 40-odd years doesn't quite make sense with everything else increasing either in cost or allowance. I like the islington idea of also bringing km² into candidate spending. From my "previous life", I know that some local parties really struggle to meet the deposit. Really struggle. I remember the same names being mentioned as "good" for donations and helping hands, so I'm aware of the consequences of raising the deposit. I'm thinking maybe £1,250 with a 7.25% threshold? Abolish the depoist and replace it with 1% of the electorate signing nomination papers equals a duly nominated candidate. Have you ever trailed round trying to get 725 valid signatures on a form? No? Thought not. |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,301 
Member is Online
|
Post by maxque on Nov 21, 2023 23:31:22 GMT
I agree that the limits are too low but I disagree with getting rid of them altogether. You don't want wealthy candidates or parties throwing oceans of cash at target seats but the present limits are so low that they create a problem for campaigns that so far as I can see have done nothing excessive or extravagant but merely put resources into conventional and legitimate campaigning methods to try to win a seat.
Maybe about £20,000 + 15p per elector + £10 per sq km up to some cap to avoid allowing gigantic spending in the Scottish Highlands.
This to apply equally to BCs and CCs; but keep the distinction, meaningless though it would then be, for the gratification of rheumy-eyed nostalgiacs such as myself.
And put the deposit up to £1500 or £2000 and require 10% of the vote to get it back.
I think that to be a good post. Of course I understand the reasons for limits but wonder if it would pose much of a problem most of the time? I don't think people are much 'bought' by material through the letterbox or hoardings. Heavy TV and internet might achieve American-style shift I suppose? I will compromise on a significant uplift and annual automatic revision upwards, coupled with index-linked significantly higher deposits with claw-back on achieving 10% of the vote. And may I add how much I enjoyed our all too brief chat and meeting you. The danger there is more in candidate selection (i.e. parties choosing candidates that will self-fund instead of using party money). |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Nov 21, 2023 23:51:11 GMT
Also, a basic minimum effort in doing an election campaign (the sort of thing I did in my three general elections (but not by-elections)) included arranging for the printing and delivery of 55,000 election leaflets. Cost about £300 to £600, depending on the quality of the paper. Time to bundle 55,000 leaflets into bundles of 100, ready for the royal mail, about 17 hours. If a party or a candidate can afford the expense of doing a basic leaflet (one per household) at the cost of a few hundred pounds, they can afford £500 for the deposit. If they think they can just swan in and get their name on the ballot paper, without bothering to do any meaningful campaigning or leafleting, then they should pay a burden as a bit of a deterrent. The spending limit gets regularly reviewed (as a couple of days ago), the simplest thing is to make the deposit a fixed proportion of the spending limit. There's too many bits of regulation where much of the same thng all has different specifications rather than them all refering to a single specification. Voting has a specified age, controlled purchases has a specified age, jury duty has a specified age, election deposit has a specified amount, spendng limit has a specified amount, MP's salary has a specified amount. Remove the duplication and make "if an adult", "fraction of spending limit", "multiple of Head of Home Civil Service", etc. You do know that this a country where local taxation is based on what properties were worth in 1991? |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,759
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Nov 22, 2023 1:29:40 GMT
Assentors prove that at least a representative of your candidature has actually been out and connected with some voters in the locality and that you're not just turning up at the Electoral Services office (which may not even be in the constituency) to lodge some paperwork and money. The effort threshold is clear and in very high profile contests it does seem to make a difference. Do you honestly think we'd have had all those mayoral candidates in 2021 with the normal requirements? Getting the signatures is the hardest part of the process. In a dead ward, almost impossible. Last year, with no car, in the "outer" ward, in the snow, when the last bus turned up and said it wasn't in service, just returning to the garage..... At least in Sheffield with 15,000 electors per ward you can just keep slogging away ringing doorbells. In Sleights I walked around the same streets eight times. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Nov 22, 2023 4:17:49 GMT
Getting the signatures is the hardest part of the process. In a dead ward, almost impossible. A 'dead ward' ? I may have the term wrong, it's been a while(!). Ward with very little if any activity or presence. Paper candidate territory. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,759
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Nov 22, 2023 5:16:12 GMT
I may have the term wrong, it's been a while(!). Ward with very little if any activity or presence. Paper candidate territory. I think everybody uses euphemisms for them - non-target, low-priority, etc. - but that's realistically what they are. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Nov 22, 2023 8:27:31 GMT
The spending limit gets regularly reviewed (as a couple of days ago), the simplest thing is to make the deposit a fixed proportion of the spending limit. That would probably require it to be anchored only to the fixed amount. If it included the variation due to borough/county and electorate size then the amount will vary all over the place, generating much confusion (Do we really trust council websites to be absolutely up to date on this?! Try finding every single raw figure for calling governance referendums...), be potentially subject to big sudden changes (especially in constituencies where large developments suddenly come on line at once and/or there's a sizeable portion of the population who often only register close to a poll) and make it harder to forward plan. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Nov 22, 2023 8:32:24 GMT
FWIW I very much enjoy what I consider a great British tradition of "eccentric" candidates standing in our election process. How much duller would elections have been without the David Sutch's, Count Binface's and Miss Whiplash's of this world? The purpose of an election is not make things exciting and fun, it's to decide on representation and who exercises power. There are plenty of other forums for silliness. But "frivolous" isn't directly meaning whether or not a candidature is a joke or not. It's meaning whether or not a candidate is taking standing seriously and has demonstrated some actual effort. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Nov 22, 2023 8:35:37 GMT
I may have the term wrong, it's been a while(!). Ward with very little if any activity or presence. Paper candidate territory. So a party locally has to set foot in a ward in order to have even paper candidates there. That is hardly a bad thing. A party that only hangs out in its comfort zone and mails in candidacies for the rest of the authority will have even less knowledge and awareness of the area as a whole. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Nov 22, 2023 8:47:36 GMT
Assentors prove that at least a representative of your candidature has actually been out and connected with some voters in the locality and that you're not just turning up at the Electoral Services office (which may not even be in the constituency) to lodge some paperwork and money. The effort threshold is clear and in very high profile contests it does seem to make a difference. Do you honestly think we'd have had all those mayoral candidates in 2021 with the normal requirements? But turned out and made an effort for what possible actual purpose? To satisfy some daft arcane imposed rule that signifies nothing at all other than knocking on doors? To show that more effort has been made than simply signing off some forms and, where relevant, going to the cash machine. This, rather than the platform and even the fee, is the test of seriousness vs frivolity. A party made up of a millionaire and/or an airwave operation has to do some work on the ground to get a wide spread of candidates and not just be a pot of money and/or a windbag (or an arse). This is a good filter. (On another point could we get a better and consistent overall arrangement for handling deposits? It's not very safe to expect agents to have to withdraw £500 from a cash machine - more for some other elections - then store it up as they accumulate the total over days due to withdrawal limits and then physically carry it to the Electoral Services office. Getting some kind of bank order, which requires not only a fee but also a local branch that's open at accessible times and has staff who know what they're doing, is not a simple easy alternative. It's also a total pain to get back, particularly when councils start insisting on only doing it by cheque and having one of the signatories away. Can we get requirements for all Electoral Services to accept electronic transfer and an automatic system of reimbursement.) |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Nov 22, 2023 10:48:28 GMT
Interesting everyone's different ideas on this, personally I'm against any deposits, if it means just 1 person chooses not to stand. Candidate and nominator signatures should be all that's needed also. Make standing as easy as possible. Longer ballot papers, voters can cope with, though I'd randomise the order of candidates.
|
|
