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

wildthing01

petetidball wrote: »

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.
.

the problem with this is that if everyone thinks 'i won't vote for the minority party, they'll never win', then a self-fulfilling prophecy is created. and in fact, as has become evident recently, minority candidates can and do win (BNP anyone???), which gives them a voice in parliament, and publicity to get their views aired in the media. if you vote for a minority party, then you are at least showing them that they have support. if everyone either doesn't vote at all, or just keeps voting for one of the big 2, just so as not to allow the other one to get in, then things will never change, we'll just keep going from red to blue and back again ad infinitum (or should that be ad nauseam?)...

and you can spoil your paper by writing 'none of the above' in big letters across it - that wouldn't make you look thick

voiceofreason

petetidball wrote: »

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.

You could, of course, write

"they're all the same"

on your ballot paper - that would have the same effect in spoling the vote, without making you look like some sort of muppet who can't hold a pencil properly......

jonah50

Thanks Martin for encouraging people to use their franchise, as you say - it didn't come cheap, even if that means spoiling their paper to register a protest.
It did not seem clear to me in your item that in fact "spoiled" votes ARE counted. I have attended counts as an observer and the number of spoiled papers was announced by the returning officer. I think this is just edited out on TV as "too boring". It would be less boring if it was the largest number of ballot papers in any one pile!
To be clear I would encourage people to vote:
1 with their heart for the candidate or party they would like to win,
2 tactically to hinder a candidate orparty that they really don't want to win (unnecessary after voting reform),
3 "spoil" the ballot paper by not showing a clear preference, this can be a big X accross the whle thing, writitng "none of the above" or "RON" or any words of your choice (but keep it clean to get it counted, the counters are innocent and no-one else is going to read it!)
Thanks for all your good work.

jonah50

alex.seaborne wrote: »

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

The key words there are "hold the executive to account"!
This is going in the opposite direction and it is the lack of accountability that leads to problems.
However we do it (and AV is a start) lets get started NOW

jonah50

Mobeer wrote: »

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.

on the contrary, surely a government that had to negotiate amongst different parties would be far more likely to come up with a fair and balanced plan acceptable to most people, rather than one that favours their shadowy sponsors and backers as happens now. Why not more money from the rich in a time of crisis (that their kind created)? Because the rich are pulling the strings! Do you really think that when a leader says he "is going to give power to YOU" he is talking to the voter or to the Lord who pays his wages?

DavidP24

I am so glad that you raised this issue. I totally understand why people are P'ed off with politicians and party politics, but please don't waste your vote.

I think that there IS a more effective way of expressing discontent than spoiling a vote and that is to vote to Sack Your MP.

Essentially this involves voting for anyone you like other than your current MP.

The Sack your MP! campaign (SYMP) is about MP reform; what has been done so far is not enough and those 146 MPs that are standing down will be paid between £5m and £9m (up to £65k each) in addition to their gold plated pension.

Rather than paying them off we should be clawing back their hideous claims and 100% of the profits from flipping properties etc, from their pensions.

http://www.sackyourmp.org/blog/80-voter-apathy

http://www.sackyourmp.org/blog/79-protest-votes

WinnyWoo

I have spoilt my ballot for years and now know that they are counted , but are they included in turnout figures?

WinnyWoo

Yes we should have a RON box on the ballot paper - I have spoilt mine for years, but apart from the tellers no one knows if you are protesting, or have just made a mistake! (Are they counted in the turnout figures?)

Not sure about the single tranferable vote system , as I figure that it could still favour the 2 main parties. We need a new system - this one harks back to the days of rotten boroughs! The system is open to abuse - in 2001 I was sent 2 polling cards, attended 2 polling stations, and was given 2 ballot papers. No ID is asked for at the poll, or when registering.

I am sure that many people vote for the perceived leader, but there is no guarantee that that leader will not be changed ( like Gordon Brown or John Major), so why not have fixed term parliaments, say 5 years, and have 2 votes on the same day - 1 for your local representative (MP) , and another for the leader of the country. The first could be a type of proportional representation , and the second a first past the post system over the whole country (most votes wins). This way you could vote for a good local person, whose leaders policys / personality you dislike.

The campaign to sack your sitting MP seems self defeating, as they WILL be entitled to a payout if you succeed! This is only right in a job with no security, and not subject to the legal protection enjoyed by the rest of us.

destroyer.tong

I am Dissapointed to see you advocating that people should visit the polling station and waste their vote by spoling the paper, we have a democracy in this country that many others do not, If people do not vote, or spoil their paper intentionaly, then they do not have the right to complain when things are not as they would like. My advice to all eligible voters is to cast a valid vote

blucan

@destroyer.tong

I have taken the time to use the comprehensive party choice tool at myvoteadvisor.com as linked to in this week's moneysaving email. Only one party came out at over 50% agreement with my responses (presumably a less than 50% score means I disagree with the party more than I agree). The one party with over 50% agreement is not standing in my constituency :mad: What would you recommend I do, destroyer.tong? You wouldn't want me voting against my conscience would you? (I can't afford to stand for election myself.) Anyone?

Also, destroyer.tong, are you sure about this country's democracy? Have you seen the Gallagher index for the last couple of general elections in this country?

So, assuming my only choice is to spoil my ballot or not turn out, what is the additional benefit of spoiling my ballot? Are statistics published for number of spoiled ballots or would I be grouped with those that can't be bothered?