|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Sept 1, 2019 12:51:07 GMT
I'd say they were very common. The only large and complex places in Wales are Cardiff and Swansea. They can have tightly drawn boundaries to free Mumbles from the blob, and then the rest of Wales can succeed in brogarwch. What is "brogarwch"? If you're suggesting much of Wales outside is made up of homogenous communities I'd have to disagree. There are parts of North Wales where two communities (who literally speak different languages) operate largely independent lives. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Sept 1, 2019 12:52:34 GMT
I have never made any secret of liking and wanting low polls from an electorate that have to put in a bit of work to even get on the register. My theory is the opposite to all current thinking. I don't want easier registration and easier voting but for both to be far more difficult. Voting is a right but it should be an earned and informed right by people will some knowledge and care. We tend to make far too much far too easy in modern life. I believe one only appreciates things that are worked for and indeed paid for. Quoted to like. Again. |
|
|
|
Post by tonyhill on Sept 1, 2019 12:58:15 GMT
Carlton's point about putting in a bit of work in order to vote is certainly one that I agree with. Going to a polling station and participating in the ritual activity of democracy is an essential part of embodying the concept of democracy in the individual. The signs (rather old fashioned) pointing one to the polling station; the tellers sat outside asking for your number; the poll card; queuing up (perhaps) to tell the clerk and presiding officer your number or address; being handed the ballot paper; going to the booth and making your decision; and placing it in the ballot box. All in themselves trivial things, but take these away by allowing or making compulsory postal or on-line voting, and you remove the warp and weft of the interface between democracy and the individual.
|
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Sept 1, 2019 13:13:12 GMT
I'd say they were very common. The only large and complex places in Wales are Cardiff and Swansea. They can have tightly drawn boundaries to free Mumbles from the blob, and then the rest of Wales can succeed in brogarwch. What is "brogarwch"? The love of one's own little area of Wales. That would be a good indication of having crossed from one bro to another. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 1, 2019 13:22:10 GMT
Carlton's point about putting in a bit of work in order to vote is certainly one that I agree with. Going to a polling station and participating in the ritual activity of democracy is an essential part of embodying the concept of democracy in the individual. The signs (rather old fashioned) pointing one to the polling station; the tellers sat outside asking for your number; the poll card; queuing up (perhaps) to tell the clerk and presiding officer your number or address; being handed the ballot paper; going to the booth and making your decision; and placing it in the ballot box. All in themselves trivial things, but take these away by allowing or making compulsory postal or on-line voting, and you remove the warp and weft of the interface between democracy and the individual. Standing in a booth at a polling station is one of the few moments in life where you can make a decision, in private, with nothing other than your thoughts to guide you. I like your post very much indeed. |
|
fourringcircus
Forum Regular
Toryism kills the humane spirit
Posts: 1,600 
|
Post by fourringcircus on Sept 1, 2019 13:30:28 GMT
I have never made any secret of liking and wanting low polls from an electorate that have to put in a bit of work to even get on the register. My theory is the opposite to all current thinking. I don't want easier registration and easier voting but for both to be far more difficult. Voting is a right but it should be an earned and informed right by people will some knowledge and care. We tend to make far too much far too easy in modern life. I believe one only appreciates things that are worked for and indeed paid for. I'm all for this, but I would take the voter registration even further. No representation without taxation! I would only allow registrants who were paying National Insurance Contributions!! No lazy voters and no senile old barstewards who care ONLY about their pension either. |
|
peterl
Green
Congratulations President Trump
Posts: 8,473
|
Post by peterl on Sept 1, 2019 13:48:18 GMT
Yes exactly, its a system built on getting the job done and done well, not on being representative. After all, its your MPs job to represent you, not a commissioner/minister. Their job is to make policy. Effective policies require subject knowledge and expertise. Your model is actually quite similar to the EU, and is quite suitable for a supranational body. In the EU the decisive body is actually the Council, but the ideas are brought forward by an executive. Parliament has a scrutiny role and also the power of dismissal of the executive if they wish. In our system, we should start with having a representative Parliament rather than the current undemocratic one. Then you might have a strong representstive select committee system with the power to co-opt experts nominated by all the Parties (hence representing different points of view). Proposing and drafting legislation would be the job of these select committees, while other committees (perhaps in a second house) would scrutinise. Solutions to difficult issues like adult social care would then have multipartisan support to a much greater degree than now Your solution is actually not a bad compromise. The fundamental essentials of either scheme at any rate would be either the abolition of at least removing a lot of the power from the current politically based executive and its replacement with a system of making policy decisions informed by evidence and expert involvement. Working up legislation through committees is a good idea for the same ideatat a commiyyee system in local government works much better in my opinion, that people of all parties can be involvd in working up a sensible proposal rather than a measure that has not always been properly throught out being imposed from the tiop. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Sept 1, 2019 14:54:08 GMT
Carlton's point about putting in a bit of work in order to vote is certainly one that I agree with. Going to a polling station and participating in the ritual activity of democracy is an essential part of embodying the concept of democracy in the individual. The signs (rather old fashioned) pointing one to the polling station; the tellers sat outside asking for your number; the poll card; queuing up (perhaps) to tell the clerk and presiding officer your number or address; being handed the ballot paper; going to the booth and making your decision; and placing it in the ballot box. All in themselves trivial things, but take these away by allowing or making compulsory postal or on-line voting, and you remove the warp and weft of the interface between democracy and the individual. Standing in a booth at a polling station is one of the few moments in life where you can make a decision, in private, with nothing other than your thoughts to guide you. I like your post very much indeed. I'm not sure I share this point of view or can empathise with it. It's years since I have been anywhere near a polling station in order actually to vote, though I have had years of visiting polling stations as an agent or as a teller since last I voted in person. My decision moment is always at home and there really isn't much decision making attached- its something to remember to do, after my mind was made up days/weeks/months/ years before. I find it fascinating that people who have been active in politics for years could still have a mystic moment as they clutch their stubby pencil and make their mark. I'm not decrying it, just amazed. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 1, 2019 15:04:26 GMT
For matureleft (to save space) I think Switzerland has a 'more' democratic system and is more reflective of public desires and much more responsive to movement in public opinion, but far from a democracy. Democracy demands involvement, awareness, engagement, education, reflection and giving up time. Most communities are far too selfish and lazy to do most of that, and more than happy to give over the heavy lifting to a group anxious to do it 'for them' but actually 'for their interest group'. It is 'our fault' that we don't have democracy because we are generally a venal, lazy, unthinking electorate, quick to demand, blame and complain, but short on thinking, helping and paying. Most can't be bothered even to vote in the occasional votes we are offered. Small communities like American Town Meetings, Swiss Cantons and Greek City States manage a higher level of involvement and thus a better reflection of public will and a breed of more participatory electors. We have an unhealthy collusion here of the unthinking mass who want 'it all provided to them without effort, involvement or payment' with a political class who don't want any 'involvement' because they know the electorate agree with them on very little. Thus we have a severely abused system that we foolishly think is a 'good' one where both sides can get an element of what they want but only at the expense of mutual dislike and distrust and more and more distance from the system that only works up to a point, that point diminishing year-on-year. I don't dissent from parts of this. The purest democracy can only work in very small, homogenous communities. And they are very rare!
As we live in more complex and populous communities compromises with purity inevitably arise. And national experience shapes those compromises.
As is our habit we have attempted to adapt institutions and systems designed for a very different age to our current purpose without much deconstruction of what we now seek and the suitability of those models to our purpose. Of course this is often argued as being our strength - continuity, lack of revolutionary change.
To pick one example: Burke defined his relationship to his electorate - as a representative not an attempted delegate. We still maintain that distinction. And pursuing that distinction inevitably brings some separation between the judgement of MPs and the sentiment (of course not always easy to define) of electors. Of course Burke operated in a different world with a tiny, bribable electorate on whom his high-minded words were probably lost! And the deference that acted as a glue allowing systems to operate has largely disappeared and can't be rebuilt.
There's space for populists offering "simple" solutions (indulging those who don't want to think hard or listen to more nuanced ideas, or, sadly, people who are desperately unhappy). There's also space (optimistically!) for those trying to rethink our institutions and system of governance. There are some MPs who show signs of that interest but the drive really needs to come from elsewhere.
I like that post for the issues clearly raised. We have the benefits and detractions of an old system rooted in a past social model that disappeared completely by WW1 but leave habits, thinking, ritual and procedure from a liesured age with far less legislation and less complexity and a government intruding and embedded in so many more areas now. Then we have unfortunately put layers of work and 'responsibility' on to MPs that had not been there. Their typical day and year is longer and the need to return to the constituency and to interact with that area and with constituents takes up vastly more time and affords many more opportunities for conflict and for dissatisfaction. And it denies MPs the ability to drive other interests and a separate income which I hold to be a very severe loss. I would love to have our MPs morphed into a rather different relationship to nearly everything. I don't want them ro be...... Party shills Party hacks Party apparatchiks Continually 'On Message' Back in Constituency too often In the HOC Chamber unless necessary or interested Acting as Social Workers/CAB/Advisers/shoulders to cry on/trouble shooters Special interest advancers or lobbyists for interests Lazy and inattentive I do want them to be Alert to constituency interests and opportunities Good specialists in only a few areas Good generalists Well informed and well briefed Active and hard working On some committees that they take very seriously Independent of mind Not hidebound by party policy With a separate income and occupation With some outside interests Literate and numerate |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 1, 2019 15:07:39 GMT
Standing in a booth at a polling station is one of the few moments in life where you can make a decision, in private, with nothing other than your thoughts to guide you. I like your post very much indeed. I'm not sure I share this point of view or can empathise with it. It's years since I have been anywhere near a polling station in order actually to vote, though I have had years of visiting polling stations as an agent or as a teller since last I voted in person. My decision moment is always at home and there really isn't much decision making attached- its something to remember to do, after my mind was made up days/weeks/months/ years before. I find it fascinating that people who have been active in politics for years could still have a mystic moment as they clutch their stubby pencil and make their mark. I'm not decrying it, just amazed. I got a PV in 2016 when I thought I would be in London on polling day (as it happens I wasn't but I was able to spend the whole day knocking up in Leeds without waiting to vote first) Now I am missing voting in person (but not because I have to decide in the polling booth) but got to vote by proxy for a German friend in the EU election. Looks like I will be holding a couple of proxy votes for an autumn GE as well |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 1, 2019 15:23:41 GMT
I had my first PV decades ago when 'on the road' with an employer but went back to Polling Station on retirement. Took up PV again on moving to Italy and kept it up since because I am old and a 20 mile round trip from polling station on single track difficult roads with no public transport.
I support having a PV and prefer it to the Proxy system, but feel it should be made more difficult, more secure and attach a cost for the bother of it. So I recommend having to attend in person at a registration office with proof of identity and proof of residence and NIC number and a fee of say £15 and need to do it again on change of surname, change of address and every 5-years.
The Registration Office should take and keep a copy signature and a photograph as evidence for checking and avoidence of personation. The NIC to be a check against registering at more than one address. One must opt for one and only one address of residence at any one time and can change it at will but only by attending in person at the office and paying a fee for the change.
I have attended my Registration Office a number of times and if I can do anyone can do it! I am in my 70s and I am a 130-mile round trip to the office and without any public transport to do it as well. That is a slam dunk on anyone else except a minority fraction of 1%.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 1, 2019 15:38:48 GMT
Quoted to like again. I have perhaps more sympathy for the "lazy" electorate in that I think a lot of them have better things to do with their time, but yes, this is the problem. That is generous of you Adam, both to 'Them' and to me. "...a lot of them have 'better things to do with their time'..." Really? You know that is an excuse don't you? Kindly meant but an excuse. If we want a better society, better governance, more competence, a more effective use of resources,etc., etc. we must be prepared to be involved a bit more to a lot more than most people are. The 'Brenda of Bristol' attitude is appalling in that many think even turning out for an election with the inconvenient frequency of every year is far too much for them and an actual imposition by these awful unthinking politicians placing onerous duties on them. That is just not good enough as a national attitude. We ought to care more, know more, follow more and do more. But many politicians are quite ambivalent in saying them want more involvement but actually not wishing for it at all. The truth is that some politicians want a mass electorate to ratify, endorse and authenticate their actions, but otherwise prefer no input because populist interests are often inimical to their own desires and to their sensibilities. That too is part of the problem. I have never made any secret of liking and wanting low polls from an electorate that have to put in a bit of work to even get on the register. My theory is the opposite to all current thinking. I don't want easier registration and easier voting but for both to be far more difficult. Voting is a right but it should be an earned and informed right by people will some knowledge and care. We tend to make far too much far too easy in modern life. I believe one only appreciates things that are worked for and indeed paid for. I take your point, both on willingness to get involved and the benefits of having to work at something. I suppose what I'm saying is that if people choose to be more interested in art, or religion, or money, or charity, or having fun, or train-spotting than in politics, then let them. Opting out is OK so long as you then don't complain or otherwise try to louse it up for those who opted in. I think your last paragraph is consistent with that. (If people are interested but are being deliberately kept out, that's different.) |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 1, 2019 15:44:34 GMT
I had my first PV decades ago when 'on the road' with an employer but went back to Polling Station on retirement. Took up PV again on moving to Italy and kept it up since because I am old and a 20 mile round trip from polling station on single track difficult roads with no public transport. I support having a PV and prefer it to the Proxy system, but feel it should be made more difficult, more secure and attach a cost for the bother of it. So I recommend having to attend in person at a registration office with proof of identity and proof of residence and NIC number and a fee of say £15 and need to do it again on change of surname, change of address and every 5-years. The Registration Office should take and keep a copy signature and a photograph as evidence for checking and avoidence of personation. The NIC to be a check against registering at more than one address. One must opt for one and only one address of residence at any one time and can change it at will but only by attending in person at the office and paying a fee for the change. I have attended my Registration Office a number of times and if I can do anyone can do it! I am in my 70s and I am a 130-mile round trip to the office and without any public transport to do it as well. That is a slam dunk on anyone else except a minority fraction of 1%. I think paying to vote would be a very retrograde step. I certainly dont support this idea of going back to a restricted franchise based on wealth or having to attend a registration office in person (which would put a huge burden on electoral offices). Postal votes are currently the most secure aspect of the whole system, because at least the signature is checked, and quite a lot are rejected. There is certainly a case for moving to photo id for voting in person. A work colleague turned up to vote in Leeds in 2017,to find both him and his wife crossed off. There was nothing to be done and he was not allowed to vote. (could have been an error by the polling clerk I guess). However although I could organise quite a lot of fake voting since I have access to the electoral register, the scale is still tens of votes, not thousands. On the general question of postal votes, they do turn out much better, which is a big argument in their favour. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 1, 2019 15:44:58 GMT
PS I haven't quite agreed with anything Defenestrated Fipplebox has said here so I've not "liked" any of the posts, but this has been one of the more interesting discussions we've had recently and I'm grateful for the issues being raised in a reasonably non-ranty way. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,772
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 1, 2019 16:28:07 GMT
I had my first PV decades ago when 'on the road' with an employer but went back to Polling Station on retirement. Took up PV again on moving to Italy and kept it up since because I am old and a 20 mile round trip from polling station on single track difficult roads with no public transport. I support having a PV and prefer it to the Proxy system, but feel it should be made more difficult, more secure and attach a cost for the bother of it. So I recommend having to attend in person at a registration office with proof of identity and proof of residence and NIC number and a fee of say £15 and need to do it again on change of surname, change of address and every 5-years. The Registration Office should take and keep a copy signature and a photograph as evidence for checking and avoidence of personation. The NIC to be a check against registering at more than one address. One must opt for one and only one address of residence at any one time and can change it at will but only by attending in person at the office and paying a fee for the change. I have attended my Registration Office a number of times and if I can do anyone can do it! I am in my 70s and I am a 130-mile round trip to the office and without any public transport to do it as well. That is a slam dunk on anyone else except a minority fraction of 1%. I think paying to vote would be a very retrograde step. I certainly dont support this idea of going back to a restricted franchise based on wealth or having to attend a registration office in person (which would put a huge burden on electoral offices). Postal votes are currently the most secure aspect of the whole system, because at least the signature is checked, and quite a lot are rejected. There is certainly a case for moving to photo id for voting in person. A work colleague turned up to vote in Leeds in 2017,to find both him and his wife crossed off. There was nothing to be done and he was not allowed to vote. (could have been an error by the polling clerk I guess). However although I could organise quite a lot of fake voting since I have access to the electoral register, the scale is still tens of votes, not thousands. On the general question of postal votes, they do turn out much better, which is a big argument in their favour. Certainly an error by the polling clerk, they should have been given pink ballots.
|
|
|
|
Post by robbienicoll on Sept 1, 2019 16:41:38 GMT
Reposting in here from the forthcoming by-elections thread that I'm happy to do the weekly and monthly summaries as well as the prediction competition unless anyone else would prefer to do so. I think it's important we keep them going as they add some context to our talk be it on the psephology or general discussion threads. I sympathise with Middleenglander's predicament and reasoning a lot. I first noticed that I'd become disillusioned with "political" politics on the morning of the Brexit vote where I realised I actually didn't care we'd voted to leave despite voting to remain. Before that I'd campaigned in the independence referendum and 2015 GE and was in a few youth activism groups. I committed a lot of time, money and effort to the latter before realising that the people and representatives I was speaking to didn't really give a shit about whatever campaign we were running and that a lot of adults were making a lot of money from overseeing our volunteering. The main reason I enjoy looking through the data for elections is that it is the last place where solely facts matter. Almost every belief and opinion in all walks of life but especially politics are now viewed through a binary prism where compromise doesn't exist. Politicians and the media bear a huge amount of responsibility for causing this and they are now feeling the rough edge of its effects. middleenglander I hope you enjoy your time away, it's been well earned. Hope to see you return soon. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 1, 2019 17:12:38 GMT
I think paying to vote would be a very retrograde step. I certainly dont support this idea of going back to a restricted franchise based on wealth or having to attend a registration office in person (which would put a huge burden on electoral offices). Postal votes are currently the most secure aspect of the whole system, because at least the signature is checked, and quite a lot are rejected. There is certainly a case for moving to photo id for voting in person. A work colleague turned up to vote in Leeds in 2017,to find both him and his wife crossed off. There was nothing to be done and he was not allowed to vote. (could have been an error by the polling clerk I guess). However although I could organise quite a lot of fake voting since I have access to the electoral register, the scale is still tens of votes, not thousands. On the general question of postal votes, they do turn out much better, which is a big argument in their favour. Certainly an error by the polling clerk, they should have been given pink ballots.
Well, maybe an error in that sense. I meant they might have crossed the wrong name off. Unfortunately there is some poor training and electoral offices understaffed as shown by the significant number of EU nationals prevented from voting in May. And some told they were not allowed to register.. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Sept 1, 2019 18:27:20 GMT
The love of one's own little area of Wales. That would be a good indication of having crossed from one bro to another. Yes, I recognised the word shortly after posting. Still not convinced it would work in places where the language changes at alternate houses! |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Sept 1, 2019 18:34:59 GMT
I had my first PV decades ago when 'on the road' with an employer but went back to Polling Station on retirement. Took up PV again on moving to Italy and kept it up since because I am old and a 20 mile round trip from polling station on single track difficult roads with no public transport. I support having a PV and prefer it to the Proxy system, but feel it should be made more difficult, more secure and attach a cost for the bother of it. So I recommend having to attend in person at a registration office with proof of identity and proof of residence and NIC number and a fee of say £15 and need to do it again on change of surname, change of address and every 5-years. The Registration Office should take and keep a copy signature and a photograph as evidence for checking and avoidence of personation. The NIC to be a check against registering at more than one address. One must opt for one and only one address of residence at any one time and can change it at will but only by attending in person at the office and paying a fee for the change. I have attended my Registration Office a number of times and if I can do anyone can do it! I am in my 70s and I am a 130-mile round trip to the office and without any public transport to do it as well. That is a slam dunk on anyone else except a minority fraction of 1%. I think paying to vote would be a very retrograde step. I certainly dont support this idea of going back to a restricted franchise based on wealth or having to attend a registration office in person (which would put a huge burden on electoral offices). Postal votes are currently the most secure aspect of the whole system, because at least the signature is checked, and quite a lot are rejected. There is certainly a case for moving to photo id for voting in person. A work colleague turned up to vote in Leeds in 2017,to find both him and his wife crossed off. There was nothing to be done and he was not allowed to vote. (could have been an error by the polling clerk I guess). However although I could organise quite a lot of fake voting since I have access to the electoral register, the scale is still tens of votes, not thousands. On the general question of postal votes, they do turn out much better, which is a big argument in their favour. You see, I view that as part of the problem rather than the solution ! Some of us have variable signatures (in my mother's case I had to have a waiver because it had become so erratic). And - certainly in Cheshire East - Agents are given no opportunity to challenge rejected postal votes. They can also be rejected if somebody inverts their date of birth for example. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,772
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 1, 2019 19:13:36 GMT
Certainly an error by the polling clerk, they should have been given pink ballots.
Well, maybe an error in that sense. I meant they might have crossed the wrong name off. Unfortunately there is some poor training and electoral offices understaffed as shown by the significant number of EU nationals prevented from voting in May. And some told they were not allowed to register.. It's almost as though they hadn't noticed the front page of the register that says: E: A non-UK EU citizen who is allowed to vote in EU and local elections, but not UK Parliamentary elections
(paraphrasing)
|
|
