If you could change one thing

[Deleted]

Feb 1, 2017 14:44:42 GMT peterl said:

Just for a bit of fun. If you could change one thing about the law surrounding elections, Parliament, local government or other constitutional issues what would it be. Let's leave the question of Europe to one side to allow for some variety. Feel free to mention a few things if you really want.

If I had only one wish, just the one, I'd introduce PR to local government in England and Wales.

[Deleted]

Just seen Richard's post. Well, fair, but it was just *one change* requested!

[IceAgeComing]

Generally the secret ballot issue isn't a huge problem - Canada and Australia provide results by polling place and you'd think that might be more of an issue in those places - both have some very remote communities that need their own polling place since ; the only places like that in Scotland are bits of the Highlands and Islands. Admittedly lots of those people vote in mobile polling places or early somehow, so it usually isn't a problem. When they do what they seem to do is merge the data for that polling place with another nearby one in order to anonymise things, although they actually don't need to do it that much, for General Elections at least, I imagine that with the turnout you see in some UK local elections they might need to do it a lot more.

One thing that I'm a fan of changing would be to get rid of the requirement that people have to vote at a particular polling place and instead adopt an Australian-style system where you could go to any polling station in your constituency - or indeed, in places where seats are very big or where boundaries are a bit dodgy and lots of people from one seat work in another you could have a polling place set up that could vote for their seat despite not being there. The argument would be that it sets up an opportunity for fraud but I don't think that holds up: you could check for double voting easily (either have an electronic system set up that links together every polling place to make sure that the register is automatically updated or just trust people on the day, then after polling day check every electoral register for names marked off more than once and then have a word with those people, and hold a re-vote for any election where the number of double votes would have influenced the result). Impersonation might be more of a problem; but I don't know any of the people who work in my local polling station and I don't know whether they could stop me voting for myself by post and then impersonating as my Dad or whatever method I'd use. Besides its not like fraud is a problem in Australia where they do these things... Its not my number one, those have already been mentioned (PR and reporting votes by polling place), but its a nice alternative.

[Crimson King]

Feb 3, 2017 10:41:49 GMT IceAgeComing said:

One thing that I'm a fan of changing would be to get rid of the requirement that people have to vote at a particular polling place and instead adopt an Australian-style system where you could go to any polling station in your constituency - or indeed, in places where seats are very big or where boundaries are a bit dodgy and lots of people from one seat work in another you could have a polling place set up that could vote for their seat despite not being there. The argument would be that it sets up an opportunity for fraud but I don't think that holds up: you could check for double voting easily (either have an electronic system set up that links together every polling place to make sure that the register is automatically updated or just trust people on the day, then after polling day check every electoral register for names marked off more than once and then have a word with those people, and hold a re-vote for any election where the number of double votes would have influenced the result). Impersonation might be more of a problem; but I don't know any of the people who work in my local polling station and I don't know whether they could stop me voting for myself by post and then impersonating as my Dad or whatever method I'd use. Besides its not like fraud is a problem in Australia where they do these things... Its not my number one, those have already been mentioned (PR and reporting votes by polling place), but its a nice alternative.

An idea I have proposed on more than one occasion. When political parties have web based computer systems that can monitor who has voted as it happens, I can't believe that the ARO couldn't do the same. I might have a higher level of proof of identity required for people not voting at there home polling station

[J.G.Harston]

Feb 3, 2017 10:41:49 GMT IceAgeComing said:

One thing that I'm a fan of changing would be to get rid of the requirement that people have to vote at a particular polling place and instead adopt an Australian-style system where you could go to any polling station in your constituency (...)

I think the simplest option would be a sort of combination of the pink ballot and postal ballot. If you vote in your 'home' district you are crossed off the paper copy of that day's valid register and given a ballot. If you go to a polling station outside your home district, your name and address is noted, you are given a ballot that is sealed in an anvelope and put in a out-of-district box. At the count these unsealed out-of-district ballots are sorted and passed to the table for their home district, and checked off the register, and if their 'home' register claims they have already voted they are put to one side as with normal 'has this person voted twice?' ballots.

It would only be practical - whatever method is used - if you still had to vote in your home electoral division for the election (eg ward for council, constituency for MP, etc.). Mercians can vote anywhere for Prez 'cos they're voting for a single nation-wide candidate, and not-at-home ballots just needs to be sorted into the relevant state.

[Andrew_S]

Feb 2, 2017 22:35:24 GMT Lord Twaddleford said:

Feb 1, 2017 16:07:56 GMT @strinity said:

Compulsory reporting of polling district results for all elections and referendums.

I'd be satisfied if they at least reported results by primary authority wards/divisions.

The one issue I see with reporting by polling districts is when you're dealing with particularly small districts, to report the results of those places specifically could potentially violate the secret ballot; perhaps in those cases their results could be reported as part of a combination of multiple small districts, or combined with a neighbouring larger district?

In places like Dixville Notch they don't seem to mind releasing voting data even though there are only 8 voters at the moment.

[East Anglian Lefty]

I like the idea of the local authority raising more of its revenue, but there are clear limits there. Certain areas have much wider tax bases than others so you'd need central redistribution, not least because the areas with narrower tax bases tend to have greater social needs. And even if you do it on a transitional basis, you'll never get close to eliminating that disparity - Pol Pot could take over Westminster Council and the business rates from Oxford Street would still pour in, whereas there's no way that Torridge District Council is ever going to be a major commercial hub.

So if I was going to make one change, I'd abolish all parish councils. It wouldn't get close to solving all the problems with the structure of local government, but almost nobody who isn't on one would actually miss them.

[J.G.Harston]

Feb 3, 2017 15:45:59 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

So if I was going to make one change, I'd abolish all parish councils. It wouldn't get close to solving all the problems with the structure of local government, but almost nobody who isn't on one would actually miss them.

NOOOOOooooooo!!!!!

Ok, my experience is with parish/town councils with populations in the 15,000-30,000 area. I was amazed when I started looking into detail how many and how tiny the parish councils in Scarborough Borough are. Some are so small they don't have a council but have a Parish Meeting. I'd support merging of smaller parishes.

Before I looked at the map I expected to find Whitby Town Council and mayby half a dozen rural parishes in the Whitby District. There's about a dozen. Then I looked in the Scarborough District and there's about 30, some you could heft a brick across.

[peterl]

If you abolish parish councils, the district councils won't have anyone to palm off the services they don't want to run to.

[gwynthegriff]

Feb 3, 2017 15:03:19 GMT J.G.Harston said:

Feb 3, 2017 10:41:49 GMT IceAgeComing said:

One thing that I'm a fan of changing would be to get rid of the requirement that people have to vote at a particular polling place and instead adopt an Australian-style system where you could go to any polling station in your constituency (...)

I think the simplest option would be a sort of combination of the pink ballot and postal ballot. If you vote in your 'home' district you are crossed off the paper copy of that day's valid register and given a ballot. If you go to a polling station outside your home district, your name and address is noted, you are given a ballot that is sealed in an anvelope and put in a out-of-district box. At the count these unsealed out-of-district ballots are sorted and passed to the table for their home district, and checked off the register, and if their 'home' register claims they have already voted they are put to one side as with normal 'has this person voted twice?' ballots.

It would only be practical - whatever method is used - if you still had to vote in your home electoral division for the election (eg ward for council, constituency for MP, etc.). Mercians can vote anywhere for Prez 'cos they're voting for a single nation-wide candidate, and not-at-home ballots just needs to be sorted into the relevant state.

The problem in Cheshire East is that the count would not be completed until mid-October (given an election in early May).

[gwynthegriff]

Feb 3, 2017 15:45:59 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

I like the idea of the local authority raising more of its revenue, but there are clear limits there. Certain areas have much wider tax bases than others so you'd need central redistribution, not least because the areas with narrower tax bases tend to have greater social needs. And even if you do it on a transitional basis, you'll never get close to eliminating that disparity - Pol Pot could take over Westminster Council and the business rates from Oxford Street would still pour in, whereas there's no way that Torridge District Council is ever going to be a major commercial hub.

So if I was going to make one change, I'd abolish all parish councils. It wouldn't get close to solving all the problems with the structure of local government, but almost nobody who isn't on one would actually miss them.

What would abolishing PCs achieve?

[No Offence Alan]

Feb 3, 2017 0:09:56 GMT Sibboleth said:

Other countries seem to deal with it. I have access to significantly better information about election results in Berlin than I do for Birmingham, and though I have an immense amount of affection for the former city I do live a lot closer to the latter...

Well, if Scotland counts as "other country" -
www.east-ayrshire.gov.uk/Resources/Elections/Ward-4/First-Preference-by-Ballot-Box.pdf

I understand if there were fewer than 200 votes in a single box, it was mixed with another box, which gets round the disclosure issue.

[Foggy]

Feb 3, 2017 10:41:49 GMT IceAgeComing said:

One thing that I'm a fan of changing would be to get rid of the requirement that people have to vote at a particular polling place and instead adopt an Australian-style system where you could go to any polling station in your constituency - or indeed, in places where seats are very big or where boundaries are a bit dodgy and lots of people from one seat work in another you could have a polling place set up that could vote for their seat despite not being there. The argument would be that it sets up an opportunity for fraud but I don't think that holds up: you could check for double voting easily (either have an electronic system set up that links together every polling place to make sure that the register is automatically updated or just trust people on the day, then after polling day check every electoral register for names marked off more than once and then have a word with those people, and hold a re-vote for any election where the number of double votes would have influenced the result). Impersonation might be more of a problem; but I don't know any of the people who work in my local polling station and I don't know whether they could stop me voting for myself by post and then impersonating as my Dad or whatever method I'd use. Besides its not like fraud is a problem in Australia where they do these things... Its not my number one, those have already been mentioned (PR and reporting votes by polling place), but its a nice alternative.

I support this. At one point I expected to be in Belfast on referendum day last year. Would've been interesting to have been able to vote in person in a completely different part of the UK.

Feb 3, 2017 20:27:26 GMT @jamesdowden said:

Feb 3, 2017 15:45:59 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

Districts should ideally be voluntary groupings of parishes, and County Councils should be abolished. 

Further evidence that the modern Conservative Party attracts people who have no regard for traditional English identity and values (although in principle I agree with the first part of that sentence!).

[John Chanin]

Feb 3, 2017 20:27:26 GMT @jamesdowden said:

Feb 3, 2017 15:45:59 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

I like the idea of the local authority raising more of its revenue, but there are clear limits there. Certain areas have much wider tax bases than others so you'd need central redistribution, not least because the areas with narrower tax bases tend to have greater social needs. And even if you do it on a transitional basis, you'll never get close to eliminating that disparity - Pol Pot could take over Westminster Council and the business rates from Oxford Street would still pour in, whereas there's no way that Torridge District Council is ever going to be a major commercial hub.

So if I was going to make one change, I'd abolish all parish councils. It wouldn't get close to solving all the problems with the structure of local government, but almost nobody who isn't on one would actually miss them.

Parish councils are the only semblance of local democracy we have left. Districts should ideally be voluntary groupings of parishes, and County Councils should be abolished. The big-ticket county-level services cannot be funded locally and should not be run by local government – the current situation is power without responsibility: LEAs should be abolished with their remaining schools being given the choice of becoming grant-maintained, independent, or closing; and social care should be funded directly through the Department of Health.

This is an absolutely classic statement of the Conservative view that they are in favour of localism, while actually wanting to centralise everything of any importance.   With the equally classic lack of understanding that that is what they are doing.

[Adam in Stroud]

Feb 4, 2017 8:38:30 GMT John Chanin said:

Feb 3, 2017 20:27:26 GMT @jamesdowden said:

Parish councils are the only semblance of local democracy we have left. Districts should ideally be voluntary groupings of parishes, and County Councils should be abolished. The big-ticket county-level services cannot be funded locally and should not be run by local government – the current situation is power without responsibility: LEAs should be abolished with their remaining schools being given the choice of becoming grant-maintained, independent, or closing; and social care should be funded directly through the Department of Health.

This is an absolutely classic statement of the Conservative view that they are in favour of localism, while actually wanting to centralise everything of any importance.   With the equally classic lack of understanding that that is what they are doing.

There is also the slight problem that if Parish (not Town) councils are to be the bedrock of democracy in this country it might be  a good idea if someone actually were to vote in the elections to them.  Indeed, it would be a start if all the councillors were elected rather than co-opted due to lack of interest.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

Feb 4, 2017 9:03:05 GMT Adam in Stroud said:

There is also the slight problem that if Parish (not Town) councils are to be the bedrock of democracy in this country it might be  a good idea if someone actually were to vote in the elections to them.  Indeed, it would be a start if all the councillors were elected rather than co-opted due to lack of interest.

Indeed. One of the problems with district level local government which led to the Redcliff-Maud commission and then to the 1970s local government reforms was that most members of Rural District Councils were being elected unopposed so that there was no proper accountability to the electorate.

[AdminSTB]

I would like councils to be legally obliged to provide historical election results for their respective areas (including abolished wards and districts) on their websites, going as far back in time as possible.

[finsobruce]

Feb 4, 2017 10:45:35 GMT AdminSTB said:

I would like councils to be legally obliged to provide historical election results for their respective areas (including abolished wards and districts) on their websites, going as far back in time as possible.

To include the discussions and results of votes (if any) of the local Witenagemots, where possible.

[No Offence Alan]

Feb 4, 2017 11:10:00 GMT ntyuk1707 said:

No Scottish Parliament: which would neatly give me my second wish of a return of First Past The Post local council elections in Scotland (which would also mean greater flexibility where constituency design is concerned)

But without the Scottish parliament there would be fewer constituencies to design!

[The Bishop]

More to the point, without a Scottish parliament we would already have an independent Scotland.....