'Should we allow votes for RON (re-open nominations)?' blog discussion

Former_MSE_Penelope

This is the discussion to link on the back of Martin's blog. Please read the blog first, as this discussion follows it.

Read Martin's "Should we allow votes for RON (re-open nominations)?" Blog.

Please click reply to discuss below.

kezbabybabe

Martin_Lewis wrote:

We have a commitment towards universal suffrage, it’s important, and we shouldn’t belittle it. It’s for this reason that I think even if you can’t bring yourself to vote for any of your slate of candidates, it’s still important to go to the ballot box and if you have to spoil your paper (put a big line through it) at least that way registering a protest.

Thanks for this part in particular Martin, I wasn't sure about spoiling my paper, but now I know.

I don't tend to get too involved in it all if I can help it, but certainly believe that we don't have a right to moan if we don't vote (though since turning 18 (I'm 27 now), I've only voted once and that was to give Labour their 2nd term).

This year, I'm either going to spoil my paper or vote for Liberal Democrats, though I think the truth will be that the country will end up being run by Conservatives, as there isn't enough foot movement to prevent it otherwise, as you say a lot of people are disenfranchised and just fed up with the lies and PR spinning that goes on.

omnipotentstudenttype

At our university we rank candidates by numeric preference, placing R.O.N. after your last preferred candidate. If there is no clear majority then the candidate with the least number of 1st votes would have their votes re-allocated to second preferences. This continues until a majority is found.

The benefits of this system are that voters can have their say in who gets in even if it's not their favourite/party candidate.

ginger_tosser

I have always thought that a legally binding "None Of The Above" should be present.
My plan to bring about this change is to have a party that fields a candidate in every seat with only 1 single election promise - TO QUIT. Thus if elected above all others then a by-election is forced and the electorate get another chance and maybe the real politicians will think long and hard about their approach.
If I had £500 to spare and a single clue about PR then I'd stand - no need to quit the day job since I wouldn't be taking the parliament job. - Martin, any chance you are willing to stump up the cash and do a bit of campaigning?

BTW, I have noticed that a change in political party naming legislation in 2006 has made it illegal to have the words "none of the above" in a party name (although a NOTA candidate did stand in the recent Norwich East By-election).

kezbabybabe

omnipotentstudenttype wrote: »

At our university we rank candidates by numeric preference, placing R.O.N. after your last preferred candidate. If there is no clear majority then the candidate with the least number of 1st votes would have their votes re-allocated to second preferences. This continues until a majority is found.

The benefits of this system are that voters can have their say in who gets in even if it's not their favourite/party candidate.

We run a Single Transferable Vote system at work for our elections and it seems to work.

spook

If we used some form of proportional representation system for our elections, the problem of 'disenchantment with politics in general' would be lessened, because people would have the opportunity to vote the smaller, more radical parties without feeling like their vote was wasted.

I think the RON idea is good though, but it doesn't go far enough in reforming our hideously un-democratic voting system. At the moment the only major party who seem committed to electoral reform is the Lib Dems, so they will get my vote (until it happens, anyway).

Mobeer

The problem with "re-open nominations" is what happens if it wins, and the new nominations are exactly the same as before? The quoted comment of “they’re all the same I don’t want any of them”, is really pretty useless if the person saying it won't stand themself. This situation arose when I was at university, and the second election dropped the re-open nominations option, with the same candidates as before, because as much as the candidates lacked general support, no-one else wanted to stand.

I could see real problems forcing through spending cuts and tax rises for a government elected as a second choice to "re-open nominations". It's better to let the disinterested not vote, so the government we get can claim to have much more support than it really had.

DarkConvict

I have always thought that a legally binding "None Of The Above" should be present.

I agree, i think in Switzerland you have to vote or get fined, so there is always the option to vote for no one.

Anyone seen doctor who episode 2, democracy at its best people vote every 5 years to forget what they have learned

badbunny42

I'd like to see a small tax, maybe £2-5 a month, refunded in full (with enough interest to cover inflation) when we vote. I believe that it would increase voter turnout if we recieved £100+ when we did it.

alex.seaborne

Definitely!

I've always thought it was unfair that citizens are forced to chose only from the people who put themselves up for election.

And if "None" did win in lots of seats, would that really be a bad thing? Citizens may chose NOT to have an MP, maybe for years! I think that's a perfectly acceptable situation. We get too much legislation these days - fewer MPs might mean fewer unnecessary and often overlapping laws.

But I also support the idea of a directly elected Executive. I've always thought that only being able to have a government made up of MPs and Lords is a bad idea too.

We should elect MPs to make laws, review them and hold the Executive to account. And we should elect the Executive to form and run a government, entirely separate from the Legislature.

And "None" should be on the ballot for the Executive too! If we chose NOT to vote to form a Government, well that's our choice. The Civil Service would just continue to run the country, as they have done for hundreds of years...

Alex

petetidball

I have never voted, even though I have had the opportunity. I'm one of the "they're all the same" brigade. Spoiling your ballot paper just makes you look like you're too thick to put a mark in the right box and voting for minority parties is not a protest, just a waste as they have no chance of ever getting enough votes to make a difference.

If RON was an option, I would vote. But for RON to work there needs to be a more American approach where we vote for a leader. To be fair, most people I know vote for the party leader anyway and are mostly unaware about who is their local representative.