|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 1, 2019 21:10:04 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. I am hardly advocating "a restricted franchise based upon wealth" by suggesting a £15 fee every 5-years to register a PV am I? That is a quite absurd notion! It is the price of a few lottery tickets, three beers, a handful of cigarettes or the fraction of the cost of one ticket on one occasion to a football match, for the convenience of voting from home. There may be checks up to a point on the PVs once registered but there is no check on the registrations of PVs. It is all too easy to farm and harvest PVs and then gather in bulk for a mass completion. Individual unaccompanied personal registration on the production of evidence is the only defence. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 1, 2019 21:18:11 GMT
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.) I am suggesting that they give the time to vote having acquainted themselves with the basic necessary facts and information...........say 10-hours or so per 5-years period! Hardly onerous is it? Don't need to give up anything at all to achieve it. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 1, 2019 21:27:22 GMT
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)
Well, the problem was that they had to fill in a form to say they were voting in the UK rather than country of citizenship. Normally those forms would be sent out at registration time in the year of an EU election, but the faffing of the govt meant there was very little time. In Kirklees only about 10% of the of the EU nationals on the local election register were on the Eu election register. People who had filled in the forms fine found themselves with the wrong code against their name and crossed out at the polling station. The electoral office in Kirklees had to work flat out including weekends to cope with an election that would normally have been combined with the locals.. I do not blame them at all for any failings and indeed I know they did all they could. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 1, 2019 21:45:23 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. I am hardly advocating "a restricted franchise based upon wealth" by suggesting a £15 fee every 5-years to register a PV am I? That is a quite absurd notion! It is the price of a few lottery tickets, three beers, a handful of cigarettes or the fraction of the cost of one ticket on one occasion to a football match, for the convenience of voting from home. There may be checks up to a point on the PVs once registered but there is no check on the registrations of PVs. It is all too easy to farm and harvest PVs and then gather in bulk for a mass completion. Individual unaccompanied personal registration on the production of evidence is the only defence. The unique signature is the check on the imdividual nature of a postal voter and otherwise they have to complete individual registration like everyone else. When you started talking about photographs and proof of residence I assumed you were talking about all voters since it seems very arbitrary to subject postal voters in particular to these extra checks. In the past there were certainly examples of postal vote fraud in certain communities. However, there is no sign of that going on in Huddersfield now (where I am a DNO). In contrast the postal voters are mostly old folk and middle class professionals, with no concentration of specific ethnic groups. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Sept 1, 2019 21:57:15 GMT
Maybe this topic needs turning round. Politicians and political parties have disappointed over the last 2,000 years. FTFY.  |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 1, 2019 22:26:54 GMT
Interesting that Nick Clegg turned some Liberal Democrats away from their party, hadn't realised that. I guess I should have expected this as Tony Blair had the same effect on Labour Voters And Nick Clegg turned out to be Tony Blair lite. Nick Clegg and his follies completely hollowed out the activist base of the Lib Dems, and destroyed much of the local government strength that was the bedrock of the Party. So from the point of view of the Lib Dems he was a disaster. Still, I was out canvassing in Hallam a couple of weeks ago and people were still speaking warmly of him. I see Clegg as basically a decent man who really believed in coalition government and did his best to make it work. However he was totally naive, and could not imagine the electoral consequences of what he was doing (which were entirely predictable). The Tories are crocodiles who happily encouraged him, smiling sweetly, and Labour took their chance to stick the knife in. (a bit like being Poland in 1939). As you say, very similar to Blair in some ways Earlier this year when the Chukas were born I thought we might be in real trouble. But the grassroots saved the Party by pounding the streets all over Britain for the local elections and that success feeding into the amazing luck of an unscheduled national election using PR has revived our fortunes. Who knows what will happen next?? |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,772 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 2, 2019 2:43:33 GMT
Interesting that Nick Clegg turned some Liberal Democrats away from their party, hadn't realised that. I guess I should have expected this as Tony Blair had the same effect on Labour Voters And Nick Clegg turned out to be Tony Blair lite. Nick Clegg and his follies completely hollowed out the activist base of the Lib Dems, and destroyed much of the local government strength that was the bedrock of the Party. So from the point of view of the Lib Dems he was a disaster. Still, I was out canvassing in Hallam a couple of weeks ago and people were still speaking warmly of him. I see Clegg as basically a decent man who really believed in coalition government and did his best to make it work. However he was totally naive, and could not imagine the electoral consequences of what he was doing (which were entirely predictable). The Tories are crocodiles who happily encouraged him, smiling sweetly, and Labour took their chance to stick the knife in. (a bit like being Poland in 1939). As you say, very similar to Blair in some ways One of Clegg's failings is that he parachuted himself in from European politics into UK Parliamentary politics and thought he could ignore reality (or just was blind to reality) and just do things as though he was just translating sideways from being an MEP in Brussells.
Edit: One of the most annoying things for me is he seemed to exude an attitude of: local elected representives are an irritating nuisance. Every policy turn seemed *designed* to wipe out LibDem local councillors.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,772
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 2, 2019 2:47:38 GMT
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)
Well, the problem was that they had to fill in a form to say they were voting in the UK rather than country of citizenship. Normally those forms would be sent out at registration time in the year of an EU election, but the faffing of the govt meant there was very little time. In Kirklees only about 10% of the of the EU nationals on the local election register were on the Eu election register. People who had filled in the forms fine found themselves with the wrong code against their name and crossed out at the polling station. The electoral office in Kirklees had to work flat out including weekends to cope with an election that would normally have been combined with the locals.. I do not blame them at all for any failings and indeed I know they did all they could. I would normally rant "You've had XXX years to make good on your statement that you're made this country is your home and fill in the relavant forms", but after months of May categorically stating There Would Be No EU Elections Full Stop you can understand why people would have dismissed from their minds even thinking about getting around to it. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 2, 2019 5:50:52 GMT
Well, the problem was that they had to fill in a form to say they were voting in the UK rather than country of citizenship. Normally those forms would be sent out at registration time in the year of an EU election, but the faffing of the govt meant there was very little time. In Kirklees only about 10% of the of the EU nationals on the local election register were on the Eu election register. People who had filled in the forms fine found themselves with the wrong code against their name and crossed out at the polling station. The electoral office in Kirklees had to work flat out including weekends to cope with an election that would normally have been combined with the locals.. I do not blame them at all for any failings and indeed I know they did all they could. I would normally rant "You've had XXX years to make good on your statement that you're made this country is your home and fill in the relavant forms", but after months of May categorically stating There Would Be No EU Elections Full Stop you can understand why people would have dismissed from their minds even thinking about getting around to it. Well, it goes further than that. We dont let them vote in the elections that really matter to them, particularly the referendum, and then here comes an election where the MEPs will only last a few months. We have taken so much away fron these people, patronised them at best, vilified them at worst, and then kicked them in the teeth after all they have done for this country. "Sod your British forms, I am voting in Poland" would be my reaction. (or worrying about what feeble excuse will be used to turn down my citizenship application this time) |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 2, 2019 6:03:16 GMT
Nick Clegg and his follies completely hollowed out the activist base of the Lib Dems, and destroyed much of the local government strength that was the bedrock of the Party. So from the point of view of the Lib Dems he was a disaster. Still, I was out canvassing in Hallam a couple of weeks ago and people were still speaking warmly of him. I see Clegg as basically a decent man who really believed in coalition government and did his best to make it work. However he was totally naive, and could not imagine the electoral consequences of what he was doing (which were entirely predictable). The Tories are crocodiles who happily encouraged him, smiling sweetly, and Labour took their chance to stick the knife in. (a bit like being Poland in 1939). As you say, very similar to Blair in some ways One of Clegg's failings is that he parachuted himself in from European politics into UK Parliamentary politics and thought he could ignore reality (or just was blind to reality) and just do things as though he was just translating sideways from being an MEP in Brussells.
Edit: One of the most annoying things for me is he seemed to exude an attitude of: local elected representives are an irritating nuisance. Every policy turn seemed *designed* to wipe out LibDem local councillors.
It was very pleasing for me that the real turning point for us this summer was not some random by-election, but was based on hard work by tens of thousands of people who delivered gains and holds up and down England. I organised the campaign for one of those gains and it feels like all my effort finally had a real impact on national politics. Voters have no idea how much effort is put into local politics by a few people and I suspect Clegg did not either. My experience of organising general election campaigns has been much less positive. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Sept 2, 2019 7:19:02 GMT
Maybe this topic needs turning round. Politicians and political parties have disappointed over the last 20 years. That begs the question. How are they as a group of individuals, as a group of parties, as individual parties, and as individuals going to turn things around, so they are more respected in the future? I am assuming for the purpose of the above question that want to and aim to do this. I think not many people have answered this because it may be insoluble.. I think STV would help. At the moment the Parties have too much control on who gets elected thanks to safe seats. It encourages a supine approach. And cooperation between Parties and consensus is punished not rewarded in FPTP. Right now we see Tory MPs basically being threatened wuth sacking if they attempt to stop what they see is folly by the leadership... |
|
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 2, 2019 7:42:17 GMT
The only way politicians are going to improve, assuming it is accepted that they have declined in quality, is to reverse the changes which have led to the decline. The most notable changes have been in the methods of candidate selection. On both sides, candidate lists are being stuffed with political groupies who have known nothing of life but politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 2, 2019 7:50:06 GMT
The only way politicians are going to improve, assuming it is accepted that they have declined in quality, is to reverse the changes which have led to the decline. The most notable changes have been in the methods of candidate selection. On both sides, candidate lists are being stuffed with political groupies who have known nothing of life but politics. But that's partially because of the play safe attitude and the way social media is treated. These professional politico wannabes know how to keep their nose clean... It's also because of the effort needed to win a seat. If it's your local one it's just about do-able if you have a job and family but if not it helps if your employer allows time off or you have private means. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 2, 2019 7:53:09 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. Perhaps it's because you haven't had any serious doubts. In 2005 I voted at 9.55pm. I stood staring at the ballot paper. I voted Labour and immediately regretted it but at the time our ward was in a marginal and I didn't want to risk a Tory MP even though I was furious with Labour. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 2, 2019 9:19:05 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 get why people think this (I quite like walking to a polling station myself) but the same could be argued about postal or even online voting? Rather its the sense when you vote in the "traditional" way, that you are doing so as part of a greater whole? That is what is special about it, I would suggest. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 2, 2019 9:46:56 GMT
Politicians have not done and are not doing well. I will also admit, its not just them have left me disillusioned, circumstances have led me to question the philosophy my parents brought me up with, finding your foundations challenged can also make one disillusioned as one adapts. I will not go into specifics, maybe another time, but I will say, in the last 10 years, I have seen from individuals in society both rich and poor, left and right such selfishness it makes me want to puke and such generosity it is heartwarming. I have also seen decisions that relate to rights, help and health that make me question why we make some decisions as individuals and as a society. In other words you have seen reality and don't fully like it? What you see is what it is and has always been for thousands of years. It is the normal state. |
|
fourringcircus
Forum Regular
Toryism kills the humane spirit
Posts: 1,600
|
Post by fourringcircus on Sept 2, 2019 20:15:49 GMT
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. Which suburb of cuckoo-land are you residing in that moment? Postal votes should be banned, as they are the most open aspect of the system to abuse. I speak as one who has been a referendum agent and seen what passes for a signature check. The signatures are not ALL checked - only the ones which the agents can see and question by looking over the shoulders of the dozens of clerks who are inputing the data. Even then, the arbitor of the questionable signatures can make ample reasons for signatures which aren't quite the same. The reference signature can also be years old - another reason not to reject. Students in residence away from home can often get two postal votes (assuming they are not studying in their home area). Nursing homes are a hot-bed of bulk postal votes being abused by getting the inmates residents to sign bits of paper with no clue about what it is. Forging a signature isn't difficult. Parents do it for their voting-age kids etc. It's a bloody farce that it all continues. Also, despite the mileage and inconvenience, I'm sure carlton43 would be bothered enough to visit a polling station, if only it wasn't made so damned easy to vote by post. If you want to be heard, get yourself along to a polling station - simples! |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 2, 2019 20:21:28 GMT
|
|
myth11
Non-Aligned
too busy at work!
Posts: 2,840
|
Post by myth11 on Sept 2, 2019 20:21:53 GMT
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. Which suburb of cuckoo-land are you residing in that moment? Postal votes should be banned, as they are the most open aspect of the system to abuse. I speak as one who has been a referendum agent and seen what passes for a signature check. The signatures are not ALL checked - only the ones which the agents can see and question by looking over the shoulders of the dozens of clerks who are inputing the data. Even then, the arbitor of the questionable signatures can make ample reasons for signatures which aren't quite the same. The reference signature can also be years old - another reason not to reject. Students in residence away from home can often get two postal votes (assuming they are not studying in their home area). Nursing homes are a hot-bed of bulk postal votes being abused by getting the inmates residents to sign bits of paper with no clue about what it is. Forging a signature isn't difficult. Parents do it for their voting-age kids etc. It's a bloody farce that it all continues. Also, despite the mileage and inconvenience, I'm sure carlton43 would be bothered enough to visit a polling station, if only it wasn't made so damned easy to vote by post. If you want to be heard, get yourself along to a polling station - simples! I agree ..... is the world about to end lol  |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Sept 2, 2019 20:31:03 GMT
Postal votes should be banned, as they are the most open aspect of the system to abuse. For the housebound? For those working away? For polling staff? |
|
