|
|
Post by jm on Feb 11, 2024 21:31:12 GMT
A question for electoral law experts. If a councillor no longer satisfies the qualification they provided on their nomination paper at the time of the last election, for example, if they were originally eligible to stand in the election by virtue of being employed within the local government area (as they are not resident there), but they subsequently lose that employment, would they be immediately disqualified?
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Feb 11, 2024 21:58:38 GMT
A question for electoral law experts. If a councillor no longer satisfies the qualification they provided on their nomination paper at the time of the last election, for example, if they were originally eligible to stand in the election by virtue of being employed within the local government area (as they are not resident there), but they subsequently lose that employment, would they be immediately disqualified? No, except if their sole qualification was though being a registered elector in the local government area. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Feb 29, 2024 10:47:25 GMT
A question relevant to today and because yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the February 1974 election which would have brought this issue up in practice.
When does somebody born on 29 February become eligible to vote? Would someone born today become eligible on:
a) 28 February 2042
b) 1 March 2042
c) 29 February 2096 (per The Pirates of Penzance)
Also is the question of a leapling's age of majority set down in a single point of law or does a leapling have to consult umpteen different inconsistent statutes and rulings to find out what they can and can't do legally on 28 February?
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Feb 29, 2024 13:37:46 GMT
A question relevant to today and because yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the February 1974 election which would have brought this issue up in practice. When does somebody born on 29 February become eligible to vote? Would someone born today become eligible on: a) 28 February 2042 b) 1 March 2042 c) 29 February 2096 (per The Pirates of Penzance) Also is the question of a leapling's age of majority set down in a single point of law or does a leapling have to consult umpteen different inconsistent statutes and rulings to find out what they can and can't do legally on 28 February? The people who were born on 29th February 1956 were NOT allowed to vote in the general election on 28th February 1974; I think it was an ad-hoc decision by the Home Office, but also that the logic of the decision was based on other rules or cases about majority ages in other contexts. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Feb 29, 2024 14:09:36 GMT
A question relevant to today and because yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the February 1974 election which would have brought this issue up in practice. When does somebody born on 29 February become eligible to vote? Would someone born today become eligible on: a) 28 February 2042 b) 1 March 2042 c) 29 February 2096 (per The Pirates of Penzance) Also is the question of a leapling's age of majority set down in a single point of law or does a leapling have to consult umpteen different inconsistent statutes and rulings to find out what they can and can't do legally on 28 February? The people who were born on 29th February 1956 were NOT allowed to vote in the general election on 28th February 1974; I think it was an ad-hoc decision by the Home Office, but also that the logic of the decision was based on other rules or cases about majority ages in other contexts. Wow. Who would have thought that this could ever have been an issue. The chance of a General Election on 28 February 18 years after a leap year, must be well under 1 in a thousand. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Feb 29, 2024 16:11:49 GMT
I suspect there have been by-elections on 28 February in non-leap even numbered years so it must have come up more than just the once.
|
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,265
Member is Online
|
Post by WJ on Feb 29, 2024 17:15:18 GMT
When was the last time a (by)election was held on the 29th off February?
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Feb 29, 2024 17:25:54 GMT
When was the last time a (by)election was held on the 29th of February? 1944, if you mean parliamentary |
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,265
Member is Online
|
Post by WJ on Feb 29, 2024 17:41:41 GMT
When was the last time a (by)election was held on the 29th of February? 1944, if you mean parliamentary Presumably more recently than that for locals? |
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,842 
|
Post by Crimson King on Feb 29, 2024 18:24:09 GMT
I cant remember where I heard/saw this in the last couple of days but I believe that the legal position is that being old enough for anything for those born on 29th Feb is on 1st March
|
|
peterl
Green
Congratulations President Trump
Posts: 8,473
|
Post by peterl on Feb 29, 2024 18:38:03 GMT
I cant remember where I heard/saw this in the last couple of days but I believe that the legal position is that being old enough for anything for those born on 29th Feb is on 1st March Barrister David Pollard has written an article looking at some of these issues. He found no English cases, but cites an Australian case (which could be considered persuasive in an English court) "PM v Childrens Court of the Australian Capital Territory [2018] ACTSC 258, 336 FLR 379 where McWilliam AsJ, having noted The Pirates of Penzance, held that the plaintiff (who was born on 29th February) was not an adult on 28th February but only became an adult on 1st March." |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Feb 29, 2024 18:54:12 GMT
If I read that article correctly then those born on 29 February 1956 could at birth have expected to be legally 18 on 28 February 1974, in England & Wales at least, but for the 1969 Act.
Wasn't the old system based on being 21 on the date of registration rather than Polling Day? That presumably avoided some problems (e.g. a just-minor with a postal vote) but could have made for a messy equality case if a Scot (or Northern Irish?) found they had to wait an extra day and thus year.
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Feb 29, 2024 19:31:11 GMT
I cant remember where I heard/saw this in the last couple of days but I believe that the legal position is that being old enough for anything for those born on 29th Feb is on 1st March Barrister David Pollard has written an article looking at some of these issues. He found no English cases, but cites an Australian case (which could be considered persuasive in an English court) "PM v Childrens Court of the Australian Capital Territory [2018] ACTSC 258, 336 FLR 379 where McWilliam AsJ, having noted The Pirates of Penzance, held that the plaintiff (who was born on 29th February) was not an adult on 28th February but only became an adult on 1st March." Ah, the Gilbert and Sullivan defence. |
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,842
|
Post by Crimson King on Feb 29, 2024 22:06:28 GMT
Barrister David Pollard has written an article looking at some of these issues. He found no English cases, but cites an Australian case (which could be considered persuasive in an English court) "PM v Childrens Court of the Australian Capital Territory [2018] ACTSC 258, 336 FLR 379 where McWilliam AsJ, having noted The Pirates of Penzance, held that the plaintiff (who was born on 29th February) was not an adult on 28th February but only became an adult on 1st March." Ah, the Gilbert and Sullivan defence. I thought you would chip in, just needed patience |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 1, 2024 9:56:18 GMT
Ah, the Gilbert and Sullivan defence. I thought you would chip in, just needed patience I'm just a here today, gondolier sort of politician. |
|
islington
Non-Aligned
Posts: 4,396
Member is Online
|
Post by islington on Mar 1, 2024 9:58:23 GMT
A question relevant to today and because yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the February 1974 election which would have brought this issue up in practice. When does somebody born on 29 February become eligible to vote? Would someone born today become eligible on: a) 28 February 2042 b) 1 March 2042 c) 29 February 2096 (per The Pirates of Penzance) Also is the question of a leapling's age of majority set down in a single point of law or does a leapling have to consult umpteen different inconsistent statutes and rulings to find out what they can and can't do legally on 28 February? The people who were born on 29th February 1956 were NOT allowed to vote in the general election on 28th February 1974; I think it was an ad-hoc decision by the Home Office, but also that the logic of the decision was based on other rules or cases about majority ages in other contexts. I actually remember this brief controversy but I think the decision was primarily based on the fact that the electoral register then in force showed persons born on 29 Feb 1956 as attaining their majority, for voting purposes, on 1 Mar 1974.
I haven't looked at an electoral register in years, but I assume persons attaining their majority during the currency of the register are still shown the same way: i.e. with the date of attainment next to their name on the list, e.g. 19/1 (if they happen to share my birthday of 19 Jan). I am guessing that in 2022 (the most recent year for which this would be relevant) persons born on 29 Feb 2004 were shown with 1/3 by their names.
I don't know exactly when the system began of showing attainers on the register, but I believe that historically one had to have achieved the age of majority, 21 in those days, by the compilation date for each year's register. This would have been some months before the register came into force, meaning that although the voting age was notionally 21 you could not in fact vote until some months after reaching that age, and if your birthday happened to fall just after the compilation date you would have to wait until you were 22 plus a few months before your name actually appeared on a current register entitling you to vote.
Those were the days, eh? Personally, I am baffled why we give people the vote at 18 (much more 16!) and I'd propose restoring the voting age to 21 if I thought anyone would second it.
Is 'leapling' a real word? If so, I like it.
|
|
islington
Non-Aligned
Posts: 4,396
Member is Online
|
Post by islington on Mar 1, 2024 10:04:14 GMT
A question relevant to today and because yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the February 1974 election which would have brought this issue up in practice. When does somebody born on 29 February become eligible to vote? Would someone born today become eligible on: a) 28 February 2042 b) 1 March 2042 c) 29 February 2096 (per The Pirates of Penzance) Also is the question of a leapling's age of majority set down in a single point of law or does a leapling have to consult umpteen different inconsistent statutes and rulings to find out what they can and can't do legally on 28 February? I like the idea of (c) and note that if this theory prevailed the magic date for someone born on 29 Feb 2028 would be 29 Feb 2104 because 2100, despite being evenly divisible by 4, is not a leap year.
Seriously, I think (b) is the answer. It has to be. Why should you be allowed to vote before attaining your 18th birthday just because you are a leapling?
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Mar 1, 2024 11:28:12 GMT
Under (c) this would make the youngest ever MP probably Heneage Legge, born 29 February 1788, elected for Banbury at "6". (Though the common law at the time would probably have held that he clocked up each new age on 28 February so was actually 31.) He is believed to be the only leapling MP on record in at least modern times:
But there are certainly those who celebrate their birthdays on 28 February (and other exactly one year stuff that goes for 28 February not 1 March) and there is clearly a general point of confusion.
This is one of the more obscure arguments for majority at 16 or 20 because then you'd only have to address this question three times every 400 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Wilkinson on Mar 1, 2024 13:16:25 GMT
Under (c) this would make the youngest ever MP probably Heneage Legge, born 29 February 1788, elected for Banbury at "6". (Though the common law at the time would probably have held that he clocked up each new age on 28 February so was actually 31.) He is believed to be the only leapling MP on record in at least modern times: *Tweet omitted* But there are certainly those who celebrate their birthdays on 28 February (and other exactly one year stuff that goes for 28 February not 1 March) and there is clearly a general point of confusion. This is one of the more obscure arguments for majority at 16 or 20 because then you'd only have to address this question three times every 400 years. That is a mildly surprising claim, seeing that the probability of being born on 29 February is only slightly below 1 in 1500. Considering the size of the House of Commons and the turnover of MPs over the last 200 years, one would have expected about half a dozen leapling MPs during that period. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Mar 12, 2024 14:09:54 GMT
Since nomination signatures has come up before in this thread...
Does anyone know the rationale behind nomination signatures being needed for the Mayor of London but not for the London Assembly? Was there some specific rationale for it at the time or was there some proposal to do away with signatures that left things where they are now?
|
|
