May on Brexit

[jaxie]

"We'll not take decisions until we are ready, we will not reveal our hand prematurely and we will not provide a running commentary on every twist and turn," she said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-37295418

Fair enough?

[bots]

i think its fair enough, we want the best terms possible, and publishing details early can jeopardise that. I wasn't a particular fan of May before she became PM, but so far she has been very steady I think.

[arista]

"Fair enough? "


No I want a start date of the 2 year out contract
the money markets are ready for it
Big money will be exchanged
once the date is announced.
keeping it Secret
is wrong

[Withano]

Aka we'll do nothing and let Labour deal with it after the next election

[arista]

Aka we'll do nothing and let Labour deal with it after the next election

No the World demands we do it now
so we need the 2 year date - start up

[joeysteele]

I agree with her in that you don't reveal your hand in situations like this, however I do not think she has a hand even hoped for let alone planned.

The truth is all the Politicians in govt. and opposition parties too never expected to be having to do this, they had no plan before the referendum, during it and clearly none after it.

None of them had a single idea how to progress in a 'leave' result.

She cannot give a timetable either as to when article 50 will be triggered, it is described as sometime next year, it may well be that is not done until after the French and German elections next year,waiting to see what changes and who they may be dealing with.

Also, there are a growing number of Conservative MPs who want Parliaments consultations before it is triggered.

I do not envy her this task she has to see through but she does need to make sure absolutely everything is right with no errors or overlooking any aspect of this monumental task.

Years of forming deals after we leave the EU will take us into another general election possibly too, she really has to address that too.
A govt. unable to have completed the leaving process and ensuring all other deals in place by the time the Country votes in another general election, only 3 years and 8 months away now as to the maximum time there can be between elections, will be a disaster.

Little wonder then, that to be fair to her, she cannot really spell anything out now.

[Livia]

Aka we'll do nothing and let Labour deal with it after the next election

Labour won't win the next election. They have no chance... they're still comsuming themselves.

[Withano]

No the World demands we do it now
so we need the 2 year date - start up

Think you need to start demanding louder cos not much is being done

[Withano]

Labour won't win the next election. They have no chance... they're still comsuming themselves.

Every party is a wreck atm, I think they stand the best chance personally.

[joeysteele]

In this political situation and with over 3 and a half years to go to the next election at present, with the NHS chaos and also the really complex task of dismantling 40 years+ of partnership and membership with the rest of Europe and the EU.
To predict anything as to the next election is very unwise in my view.

Public opinion seems to change every week almost, it may well be that Labour will not win the next election, that will be pretty unlikely anyway with the Scottish situation , however it could be a very easy thing to achieve in wiping away this govts overall majority.

There will be, no matter what the Labour situation is,an even stronger anti Conservative House of Commons,that no matter what the number of seats the Conservative party have another unifying idea comes in for all parties opposed to the Conservatives.
namely electoral reform.

The referendum has shown what it can mean when your vote does really count.

The Conservative party ad its hardline supporters may be jumping up and down with glee at Labours problems at present but it may be they will not be the ones who get the last laugh in the end.

Elections past and present have shown what can happen when parties and their core supporters arrogantly take the Country and voters for granted, and who say voters will elect this party, this leader and not that Party or Leader.

Wishful and arrogant thinking can become one of the biggest banana skins in politics.

Conservative supporters and the party too wrote Labour off in the 80s, how totally wrong they were then and I really hope they will be proven wrong again as to their arrogance now.

[joeysteele]

Every party is a wreck atm, I think they stand the best chance personally.

Let us also wait and see how the leaving plans of the EU go too, there are still many Conservative MPs who are possibly likely to not support leaving the single market.

Maybe many more issues in the Conservative party to come on Europe yet.

The only thing certain in politics is in fact that nothing is certain, except elections will be held to elect governments.

[bots]

i don't agree that the tory party is a wreck. Take a look at labour and the 2 choices it has for leader are unelectable and the party is likely to split and fight. I predict an election within the next 12 months, and the tories will win.

[joeysteele]

i don't agree that the tory party is a wreck. Take a look at labour and the 2 choices it has for leader are unelectable and the party is likely to split and fight. I predict an election within the next 12 months, and the tories will win.

To have an election in 12 months, Theresa May will have to either persuade over 100 of her MPs to vote for an election assuming all the opposition parties vote for same too.
434 MPs have to vote for a general election to be called.

Or she will have to come back to Parliament with the fixed term parliament act to get a vote to repeal it.
There is no guarantee with a small majority, she would get that through the commons and then it would also if it did, have to go to the Lords to be debated and voted on.
She cannot just now call and election at her own bidding.

At present Labour is not going to vote for an election and no way would it vote to repeal that act.
She is going to need a lot longer than 12 months now in the current climate to get all that done.

[Tom4784]

If the Tories get voted in again after the ****show that has been this regime then I'm done with politics and won't ever bother voting again. Let the public lie in a bed of **** of their own making.

[bots]

To have an election in 12 months, Theresa May will have to either persuade over 100 of her MPs to vote for an election assuming all the opposition parties vote for same too.
434 MPs have to vote for a general election to be called.

Or she will have to come back to Parliament with the fixed term parliament act to get a vote to repeal it.
There is no guarantee with a small majority, she would get that, through the Commons, and then it would have to be debated and voted and passed by the Lords too.

At present Labour is not going to vote for an election and noway would it vote to repeal that act.
She is going to need a lot longer than 12 months now in the current climate to get all that done.

picture the scenario .... May says in 3 months time ... we are having an election. Are labour really going to say, with any credibility, no, no, we are not ready yet, you carry on for your full term ... not in a million years :laugh:

[joeysteele]

picture the scenario .... May says in 3 months time ... we are having an election. Are labour really going to say, with any credibility, no, no, we are not ready yet, you carry on for your full term ... not in a million years :laugh:

She cannot just say that, parliament has to vote for an election the PM has not that power now.
She would need all the SNP, Labour, Plaid Cymru MPs,the Green MP, all the Northern Irish parties MPs and the UKIP MP along with over 100 of her own MPs at least to get to 434 MPs supporting an election.

Labour has to act in its own interests and its supporters, an election now is for sure far from that,and Labour would rightly not be forgiven for opening the door to a Conservative govt with a greater majority from an election.

Not a chance would Labour, or indeed in my view,likely other parties vote for an election now.
The SNP for one will not want to risk losing any of its Westminster seats really.

[bots]

She cannot just say that, parliament has to vote for an election the PM has not that power now.
She would need all the SNP, Labour, Plaid Cymru MPs,the Green MP, all the Northern Irish parties MPs and the UKIP MP along with over 100 of her own MPs at least to get to 434 MPs.

Labour has to act in its own interests and its supporters, an election now is for sure far from that,and Labour would rightly not be forgiven for opening the door to a Conservative govt with a greater majority from an election.

Not a chance would Labour, or indeed likely others parties vote for an election now.

if labour threw away the chance of getting in to government, it would destroy them as a party for decades. Not going to happen. Wasn't it only a few short months ago that labour were saying the government had no mandate without an election to trigger article 50? Can't have it both ways :hee:

[jaxie]

Aka we'll do nothing and let Labour deal with it after the next election

Labour have no hope of winning any elections in the forseeable future. They are a mess, they don't have a leadership, they don't have a viable replacement leadership. No one is going to vote for Corbyn or the new guy.

[Livia]

Every party is a wreck atm, I think they stand the best chance personally.

I have to disagree, Withano. No one wants Corbyn to win the Labour leadership election more than the Tories. I worked in politics for a long time and I've never seen a political party shooting itself repeatedly in the foot more times than Labour has. Conservatives have also been through a rocky patch but have gained a little stability with May being brought in at the helm and although people will tell you differently, there was always a contingency plan in the Brexit vote was "leave".

[jaxie]

If the Tories get voted in again after the ****show that has been this regime then I'm done with politics and won't ever bother voting again. Let the public lie in a bed of **** of their own making.

That's the way to change things! :laugh:

Labour won't win because they are a mess. For a new Labour government we have to wait until they get a clue otherwise there is no one else but tory.

[joeysteele]

if labour threw away the chance of getting in to government, it would destroy them as a party for decades. Not going to happen. Wasn't it only a few short months ago that labour were saying the government had no mandate without an election to trigger article 50? Can't have it both ways :hee:

No,Labour didn't, they said she should present a plan for leaving to the voters before triggering article 50,they also said a general election was a way to do so for all parties.
Since she is now not triggering article 50 until at least next year sometime, Labour now are calling for ,as even some Conservative MPs want too, parliament to have a vote on the timing of triggering article 50.

No party at all is going to vote for an election they really believe they could lose at the time.
By voting for an election now, Labour could see the Conservatives in power for even longer than just over another 3 years, no way at this present time with polls as they are, will Labour vote for a general election.

That would be in my view total madness to vote for an election to 'suit' only the Conservatives.

Can you really see all the parties of the Commons voting for an election.
I maybe mistakenly said earlier the only thing certain in politics is that nothing is certain but on this, I step back from that as no way would they 'all' vote for an election for sure.

[joeysteele]

We would all love to be enlightened as to any contingency plan,( if there ever really was or is one),that 'any' of the Parties had as to this EU referendum and the event of a 'leave' result.

Probably even the present govt would like to hear it too.

[bots]

No,Labour didn't, they said she should present a plan for leaving to the voters before triggering article 50,they also said a general election was a way to do so for all parties.
Since she is now not triggering article 50 until at least next year sometime, Labour now are calling for ,as even some Conservative MPs want too, parliament to have a vote on the timing of triggering article 50.

No party at all is going to vote for an election they really believe they could lose at the time.
By voting for an election now, Labour could see the Conservatives in power for even longer than just over another 3 years, no way at this present time with polls as they are, will Labour vote for a general election.

That would be in my view total madness to vote for an election to 'suit' only the Conservatives.

Can you really see all the parties of the Commons voting for an election.
I maybe mistakenly said earlier the only thing certain in politics is that nothing is certain but on this, I step back from that as no way would they 'all' vote for an election for sure.

lets revisit later in a few months :pipe2:

[jaxie]

We would all love to be enlightened as to any contingency plan,( if there ever really was or is one),that 'any' of the Parties had as to this EU referendum and the event of a 'leave' result.

Probably even the present govt would like to hear it too.

If they are keeping plans close to their chests because they don't want to put all their cards on the table we can't really also demand to know plans, we are just going to have to wait and see.

[jaxie]

From what I understand of what is going on with Labour is that they have a lot of new young members in the party and in pressure groups. Jeremy is down with the kids who love him and see him as some sort of soft spoken hippy cnd hero who will right all the wrongs of politics. They want him as leader and are loading all the voting etc with their weight.

However to actually get him elected in parliament they need the rest of us, particularly floating voters like me. They haven't a hope in hell of persuading me to vote for him.

Hiliary Benn, I might actually be persuaded.

[arista]

If the Tories get voted in again after the ****show that has been this regime then I'm done with politics and won't ever bother voting again. Let the public lie in a bed of **** of their own making.



2020
many changes by then.

Dezzy the Doom Reaper

[arista]

Think you need to start demanding louder cos not much is being done


Its being done
but not gone with Public getting the Dates
and most business deals are 5 year projections
that need to know the next few years clear

[Vicky.]

Aka we'll do nothing and let Labour deal with it after the next election

:D

And take credit if it happens to go well, and blame them for everything if it goes to crap.

I do not think ANY leader is happy about this brexit thing and it seems to be just passing the buck tbh. Cameron left as he had no clue how to handle it...**** knows why May took it up but I guess someone had to

(I don't think labour will win the next election mind..so I don't think this will work)

[the truth]

Every party is a wreck atm, I think they stand the best chance personally.labour ? Lol tell me you're joking please

[joeysteele]

By 2020, we have no idea what the voters may be looking for as to a UK out of the EU, we have no idea what errors this govt is going to make on domestic issues either.

Sadly but a fact,a fair number not able to be measured, of those in their late 70s, 80s and even 90s, who voted in the referendum and in the May 2015 election for this govt, will not be here any longer.
Those aged 15, 16, and 17 now, who were denied a vote in the referendum by this govt, will also then be able to vote too.

The electorate, or the majority of it, may well be looking for something entirely different from the status quo and 10 years of Conservative dominance in govt again by 2020.

Also depending on what happens in Scotland and this EU vote,if Scotland is heading for another independence referendum.
Then it is felt that this govt has not only helped create the scene of the UK leaving the EU but also the break up of the United Kingdom too, then the possible backlash at that time against this govt could be almost unprecedented.

Who knows, however very unwise to predict how anything will go in just over 3 and a half years time.
Labour is near always assured of 27% of the vote,that will still leave them with around 200 seats, not a chance to be obliterated.

[the truth]

I predict labour will be obliterated

[arista]

:D

And take credit if it happens to go well, and blame them for everything if it goes to crap.

I do not think ANY leader is happy about this brexit thing and it seems to be just passing the buck tbh. Cameron left as he had no clue how to handle it...**** knows why May took it up but I guess someone had to

(I don't think labour will win the next election mind..so I don't think this will work)


Wrong ,he knows the Work now being done
but refused to do it himself, as he wanted to stay in the Corrupt EU,
and many outside of the Conservatives
are well happy he resigned FAST

[arista]

I predict labour will be obliterated


2020 is to far to say anything.


First Get the Feck out of the EU
they are still taking millions from us.
That's our money that we want to spend
not sent in a loop de loop in Corrupt EU

[arista]

"if Scotland is heading for another independence referendum"


but she can not get that done - Conservatives blocking her
plus up there some want out of the EU

[joeysteele]

"if Scotland is heading for another independence referendum"


but she can not get that done - Conservatives blocking her
plus up there some want out of the EU

If Nicola Sturgeon gets an independence vote passed in Holyrood,whatever this govt says now, they will have to grant it.
Even Ruth Davidson the Scottish Conservative leader,who is against a new independence vote herself,has stated it would be wrong for Westminster to refuse one if passed in Holyrood.

Which it would be passed, as the SNP and also the Greens there favour a new vote and have a majority in the Holyrood assembly.

[the truth]

If Nicola Sturgeon gets an independence vote passed in Holyrood,whatever this govt says now, they will have to grant it.
Even Ruth Davidson the Scottish Conservative leader,who is against a new independence vote herself,has stated it would be wrong for Westminster to refuse one if passed in Holyrood.

Which it would be passed, as the SNP and also the Greens there favour a new vote and have a majority in the Holyrood assembly.

scotland voted no and theyre way poorer than before because their oil reserves have almost disappeared. snp are xenophobic anti free market mob...they are there as an anto establishment rebel vote, except their policies will in the longer term fail spectacularly

[user104658]

scotland voted no and theyre way poorer than before because their oil reserves have almost disappeared. snp are xenophobic anti free market mob...they are there as an anto establishment rebel vote, except their policies will in the longer term fail spectacularly

There is still plenty of oil in the North Sea reserves (in strong theory). Whether or not oil companies will invest in finding it and drilling for it is another matter. The real problem was that oil prices started flipping and flopping all over the place for various global political reasons and confidence fell.

That said, I have absolutely no doubt that (with oil being a finite resource) the oil that is left will be highly valuable again, at some point. Exactly when, is the unpredictable part.

[the truth]

First, the immediate economic aftermath defied the referendum scaremongering. The FTSE 100 and 250 are higher now than before the referendum campaign was launched in February. Consumer confidence has rebounded, employers are hiring more staff, and export orders are rising. The pound has rallied, and its residual devaluation has boosted exports. Lord King, former governor of the Bank of England, argues that the UK economy since the referendum is “now in a better position to rebalance” away from consumer spending towards export-driven growth.

but labour still want a re run.....I would be my life that labour will be destroyed by 2020 they are an absolute joke.....consumed by spin and perverted political correctness, total anti business, totally consumed by delusion and in fighting.....they will never ever come back

[joeysteele]

First, the immediate economic aftermath defied the referendum scaremongering. The FTSE 100 and 250 are higher now than before the referendum campaign was launched in February. Consumer confidence has rebounded, employers are hiring more staff, and export orders are rising. The pound has rallied, and its residual devaluation has boosted exports. Lord King, former governor of the Bank of England, argues that the UK economy since the referendum is “now in a better position to rebalance” away from consumer spending towards export-driven growth.

but labour still want a re run.....I would be my life that labour will be destroyed by 2020 they are an absolute joke.....consumed by spin and perverted political correctness, total anti business, totally consumed by delusion and in fighting.....they will never ever come back

Labour doesn't want a re-run,the Lib Dems do and labour would in all likelihood be sympathetic to that.
However what Labour wants is the deal that is planned to be gone for to be put again to the voters.

We also really cannot discount further problems to come yet and Theresa May herself even says the future is uncertain with possible problems for the UK economy still to come.
That is very possible,she has said the triggering of article 50 will not be done this year, no one has said when it will be next year either yet.
That has likely held off in part some of the expected problems.

Therefore we haven't brexited yet and indeed, have not yet even started the process of doing so.
It may well be problems will come once article 50 is finally triggered, meanwhile the vote to leave at present actually remains just that, an advisory vote to leave.
One hopes no major problems will come into play but they are still a likely probability.
The actual leaving process has not in any way officially begun yet except to appoint Ministers as to it.

[the truth]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/06/in-the-wake-of-the-referendum-our-trade-prospects-are-on-a-virtu/

Instead, diplomacy will focus on where, between the range of tariff-free trade (that we already enjoy) and average EU external tariffs of 3.6 per cent, we end up. There is strong mutual interest in avoiding new tariffs. Yet any new trade barriers would hit Continental businesses far harder, because they sell £68 billion more to us each year than we do to them.

First, the immediate economic aftermath defied the referendum scaremongering. The FTSE 100 and 250 are higher now than before the referendum campaign was launched in February. Consumer confidence has rebounded, employers are hiring more staff, and export orders are rising. The pound has rallied, and its residual devaluation has boosted exports. LoIn fact, the letter was addressed to both the EU and the UK, making the case against erecting trade barriers. Such pressure will help Britain’s negotiations with the EU. Equally, the chief executives of Toyota and Hitachi have said their firms will stay in the UK regardless of Brexit, and in July Japanese IT firm SoftBank announced £24 billion more investment in the UK.

lord King, former governor of the Bank of England, argues that the UK economy since the referendum is “now in a better position to rebalance” away from consumer spending towards export-driven growth.

[Rob!]

I think May implying she even has a plan is laughable. Neither she or any one in government has had or does have a clue of how to take Britain out of the EU without there being some modicum of bloodshed in the process. Is it possible for the vote to be quietly ignored and we carry on as if nothing had happened? I can't help but feel this all happened at a very scary time in world history and frankly I think we need all the help we can get. I read an article somewhere that said Britain's military defences are at risk post Brexit for example.

[user104658]

I think May implying she even has a plan is laughable. Neither she or any one in government has had or does have a clue of how to take Britain out of the EU without there being some modicum of bloodshed in the process. Is it possible for the vote to be quietly ignored and we carry on as if nothing had happened? I can't help but feel this all happened at a very scary time in world history and frankly I think we need all the help we can get. I read an article somewhere that said Britain's military defences are at risk post Brexit for example.
Indeed...

"We're not telling you about any plans but we do have one! Honest!"

The truth is that they're still at the stage where they have a hundred lawyers sat in a room looking at all the ways we are completely fused to the EU, and trying to figure out if it is feasible to separate at all... So no, there is definitely not any sort of plan beyond that for how or when to actually do it.

[bots]

Indeed...

"We're not telling you about any plans but we do have one! Honest!"

The truth is that they're still at the stage where they have a hundred lawyers sat in a room looking at all the ways we are completely fused to the EU, and trying to figure out if it is feasible to separate at all... So no, there is definitely not any sort of plan beyond that for how or when to actually do it.

yes, but they are in the process of formulating it. Once we invoke article 50, there will then be a 2 year period of defining how we will operate post brexit. It would be madness to cripple our negotiations by making throw away comments at this stage that could prematurely affect negotiations before they have even started.

[user104658]

yes, but they are in the process of formulating it. Once we invoke article 50, there will then be a 2 year period of defining how we will operate post brexit. It would be madness to cripple our negotiations by making throw away comments at this stage that could prematurely affect negotiations before they have even started.

I'm not saying they should share what plans they have just to prove that they have them... I'm just sceptical that they are really much further on than they were the day after the vote, and the fact that it would be bad to "show their hand early" is more convenient than anything else because it means that they don't have to admit just how difficult (i.e. potentially impossible) it will be to cleanly separate from the EU.

[joeysteele]

I think May implying she even has a plan is laughable. Neither she or any one in government has had or does have a clue of how to take Britain out of the EU without there being some modicum of bloodshed in the process. Is it possible for the vote to be quietly ignored and we carry on as if nothing had happened? I can't help but feel this all happened at a very scary time in world history and frankly I think we need all the help we can get. I read an article somewhere that said Britain's military defences are at risk post Brexit for example.

Really good points.
You are right, it is I would agree that it is laughable to believe Theresa May has a plan.

[arista]

If Nicola Sturgeon gets an independence vote passed in Holyrood,whatever this govt says now, they will have to grant it.
Even Ruth Davidson the Scottish Conservative leader,who is against a new independence vote herself,has stated it would be wrong for Westminster to refuse one if passed in Holyrood.

Which it would be passed, as the SNP and also the Greens there favour a new vote and have a majority in the Holyrood assembly.

Yes with the Greens backing her
she can do it,
but will she?

[Livia]

yes, but they are in the process of formulating it. Once we invoke article 50, there will then be a 2 year period of defining how we will operate post brexit. It would be madness to cripple our negotiations by making throw away comments at this stage that could prematurely affect negotiations before they have even started.

Great post as usual... there is nothing to add. Unless you're rabidly anti-Tory then you can make loads of stuff up.

[joeysteele]

Yes with the Greens backing her
she can do it,
but will she?

If the message she gets from the Scots that a referendum has a fair chance of being won this time, yes she will.

Obviously the Conservative govt. here would not want that, it is a party of passionate unionists after all, this would be one of the last things it would want to happen..

However,it would be both unwise and likely seen as wrong too, to stand in the way of a further referendum, if it was passed in Holyrood.

I actually think, faced with the prospect of a Conservative UK govt likely being elected again, as the signs would indicate at this time anyway.
That could make Scots more determined to finally cut itself off from the UK.

We are in uncharted waters for sure both as to Scotland and as to the EU.
The future is virtually unpredictable politically.

[Livia]

Yes with the Greens backing her
she can do it,
but will she?

I think if there's another referendum concerning Scottish independence, the vote should be given to the English.

[joeysteele]

yes, but they are in the process of formulating it. Once we invoke article 50, there will then be a 2 year period of defining how we will operate post brexit. It would be madness to cripple our negotiations by making throw away comments at this stage that could prematurely affect negotiations before they have even started.

We had a referendum though bitontheslide, where we were told what the voters should and could get in the event of a 'leave; result.
There should have been concrete ideas at the very least as to what is totally acceptable and what is not.

She has in her cabinet, Liam Fox, Boris Johnson and David Davis, 3 of whom regularly 'told' the voters what to vote for.

The EU must have no doubt what they wanted.

All she is doing now is saying very little as to the way forward and removing the promises,yes the promises, made by this 3, certainly as to the points system.
I voted remain as you know,however the vote is to leave, so I want to see the best for the UK from the negotiations.
I immediately welcomed Theresa May and David Davis saying a National consensus was wanted as to the leaving of the EU.
That is a good move and I hope it is stuck to.


Separate matter now,nothing to do with yourself.
I am not in any way heavily anti Conservative,I dislike intensely many of its policies but they do not do everything wrong, just as no party does really.
That is unlike some who are anti Labour, (and anti the left of politics in general),no matter what Labour says or does and often really unfairly in my view, scathing in their attack on that Party with massive unfounded statements about same too.

[Tom4784]

That's the way to change things! :laugh:

Labour won't win because they are a mess. For a new Labour government we have to wait until they get a clue otherwise there is no one else but tory.

There's no point in caring if the majority refuse to learn from their mistakes.

[arista]

I think if there's another referendum concerning Scottish independence, the vote should be given to the English.


Yes I would vote Scotland out of the UK


Republic of Scotland
would then use € and pounds

[joeysteele]

Yes I would vote Scotland out of the UK


Republic of Scotland
would then use € and pounds

I honestly don't know why Scotland did not vote to leave last time and not trust the English MPs, people and PM who said they were wanted.

It seems some of the English are only happy with other Nations when they totally toe the line of England's will.

I am really glad I am not one of those who think possibly these Islands are just for the English.
Really sad to see such divisiveness.

[Livia]

There's no point in caring if the majority refuse to learn from their mistakes.

One man's mistake is another man's well thought-through decision.

[joeysteele]

There's no point in caring if the majority refuse to learn from their mistakes.

I understand your disillusionment Dezzy but it has not been the majority's mistake really.

The majority of voters have not voted for any one party in govt since the start of the 1950s.

Now they get there with even just under two thirds of voters voting against them and even a less representation of the total vote from the eligible electorate.

Some like to think the majority have supported them however.

If we could persuade the majority to back the party that can beat another, that would be a different matter.
However for me now and maybe you would disagree with this, but I now think the time has come for a far more representative reflection of the votes cast in elections.
This system now stinks no matter which party wins.

Right now up to 2020, if that is when the election actually is held, that will be 15 years in total and 3 full elections where the leading party only got between 35% and 37% of the votes.
2020 likely to bring about another mid 30s percentage result as to votes won too.

Hardly conclusive support and it should never be that a govt can win power on those figures and govern any real democracy alone.

[the truth]

The solution is simple...have 2 rounds of voting. Round 1 everyone in. Then round 2 just 2 parties left and see how the votes go

[user104658]

The solution is simple...have 2 rounds of voting. Round 1 everyone in. Then round 2 just 2 parties left and see how the votes go
It would be a much better system, and much more reflective of the true will of the majority... If it wasnt for the high levels of voter apathy. It's hard enough getting people to go out and vote once, let alone twice.

You would have to change how the entire system of representation works in the UK though. Which isn't a huge problem as far as I'm concerned because, frankly, it doesn't really work.

[jaxie]

I've had lots of discussions with a friend before about voter apathy and not complaining if you aren't taking part. I personally believe we should all go to postal voting to get over voter apathy.

[arista]

I've had lots of discussions with a friend before about voter apathy and not complaining if you aren't taking part. I personally believe we should all go to postal voting to get over voter apathy.



Then loads of Dead people
end up voting Labour
thats their Corruption

[the truth]

It would be a much better system, and much more reflective of the true will of the majority... If it wasnt for the high levels of voter apathy. It's hard enough getting people to go out and vote once, let alone twice.

You would have to change how the entire system of representation works in the UK though. Which isn't a huge problem as far as I'm concerned because, frankly, it doesn't really work.

you could carry on with the old system with each mp winning their seat....however there could be an option to vote your second favourite....when the results are done..they could collate the total of first and second votes to see what the majority voted for...even then it would only be symbollic in a sense. the trouble you have now is areas that are permanently one party so the individual feels their vote is meaningless....thats 1 major reason why the EU referendum was so exciting every voted counted

[Livia]

I've had lots of discussions with a friend before about voter apathy and not complaining if you aren't taking part. I personally believe we should all go to postal voting to get over voter apathy.

In the constituency where I live approximately a third of all votes cast are postal votes. It's a massive amount... and it's not only elderly people who are voting by post whereas it used to be predominantly the elderly.


Then loads of Dead people
end up voting Labour
thats their Corruption

Postal votes are very carefully watched and bar-coded and electoral services use only the current electoral register. It's updated monthly and linked to the register of deaths and to the Council Tax office. There would be a very low risk of dead people's votes being cast by others.

[arista]

"Postal votes are very carefully watched and bar-coded and electoral services use only the current electoral register."

Yes but others still vote for others
no one there to see what goes on etc.
Corruption

[joeysteele]

"Postal votes are very carefully watched and bar-coded and electoral services use only the current electoral register."

Yes but others still vote for others
no one there to see what goes on etc.
Corruption

They can arista, I agree.

[Livia]

"Postal votes are very carefully watched and bar-coded and electoral services use only the current electoral register."

Yes but others still vote for others
no one there to see what goes on etc.
Corruption

The Electoral Commission oversees all elections in the UK and prosecutes wrongdoings when they find them. Fiddling with an election carries a jail sentence. I have faith in them.

[Kizzy]

Remember when all those postal votes went AWOL from a post office van during the GE? In a Labour borough.... convenient that eh?

[joeysteele]

"Postal votes are very carefully watched and bar-coded and electoral services use only the current electoral register."

Yes but others still vote for others
no one there to see what goes on etc.
Corruption

I think and correct me if I am wrong, part of what you are getting at is there is no overseeing of a postal vote as there is with the polling station.

How do we know the person who has the postal vote, is the person who actually has voted on the form with their own choice,not being pressured or even just someone else voting for who they want, with the postal voter merely signing the declaration.

How do we know also, that the postal vote requested, has been requested by the person concerned and not someone applying for them using their name.

No one sees what goes on with those voting with a postal vote, I think it is open to all sorts of re-directed votes possibly.

All anyone needs is a name and a date of birth of someone.
Yes a signature too but anyone can sign a form,wit possibly the person named as a postal voter, not having cast the vote themself.
Also since no proof of signature is asked for on application, anyone could get a postal vote in someone else's name, who doesn't use their vote normally, but use it for themselves to vote again.

None of that is really checked out.
Therefore some at least or even many postal votes are more likely open to misuse.

[Livia]

How do we know the person walking into the polling station with a polling card is the same person as the name on the card?

[bots]

this has strayed off topic a bit :laugh:

Any form of voting is open to abuse, voting at polling stations suffers too. The trick is to keep it within limits not likely to affect the overall result, which could be a problem in marginals, and of course, it is those very seats where elections are won or lost. The system we have may not be perfect, but it does have a pretty good record overall. Until we move to a system of vein identification (it is coming) it will do.

[Kizzy]

How do we know the person walking into the polling station with a polling card is the same person as the name on the card?

The poll card is posted to the address as the postal vote...A cross in a box proves what exactly?

[jaxie]

The poll card is posted to the address as the postal vote...A cross in a box proves what exactly?

A signature is required for a postal vote as well.

[Kizzy]

A signature is required for a postal vote as well.

And what do they have as comparison with the postal votes, who is cross referencing these signatures?.... Is the mail as safe as a ballot box?

[jaxie]

And what do they have as comparison with the postal votes, who is cross referencing these signatures?.... Is the mail as safe as a ballot box?

Ask them? :shrug:

[Kizzy]

Ask them? :shrug:

I don't have to... I know there is no way there is going to be some guy say there scrutinising signatures on postal votes.... I also know that ballot boxes would not be abandoned on a street corner to be stolen as the postal votes were last year.

[joeysteele]

A signature is required for a postal vote as well.

How do they know the person asking for the postal vote is the person named on the register.
No signatures are cross checked,if you had to go with id and a signature id too, to qualify for a postal vote fair enough.

What if someone just applies, that lives at the same address, then gets an additional vote for themselves, rather than for the person.

Also who is watching when a person makes a postal vote out,are they voting for who 'they' really want to or what someone else may be 'guiding' or even 'telling' them to do.
Or indeed may they just be signing the form and some other person filling the vote in anyway as to how they have voted.
I agree with arista, postal voting is more open to possible 'interference' from other individuals and may be far from private too.

At a polling station, anyone going there,would not be taking anyone else in to the actual polling booth, or even discussing their voting with anyone else while in the polling station.
With the attendants watching them.
A very big difference.

Anyway while we are heading to leave the EU and it seems no one in govt, or anywhere else, has a clue how to go about that, perhaps across the board at the same time, it could be looked into as to a new voting system for the UK now and some tightening up with photo and signature id required to gain postal votes.

[joeysteele]

The Electoral Commission oversees all elections in the UK and prosecutes wrongdoings when they find them. Fiddling with an election carries a jail sentence. I have faith in them.

The relevant point being 'when' they find them, what if they 'never' find them or indeed in any way learn about them.

[jaxie]

How do they know the person asking for the postal vote is the person named on the register.
No signatures are cross checked,if you had to go with id and a signature id too, to qualify for a postal vote fair enough.

What if someone just applies, that lives at the same address, then gets an additional vote for themselves, rather than for the person.

Also who is watching when a person makes a postal vote out,are they voting for who 'they' really want to or what someone else may be 'guiding' or even 'telling' them to do.
Or indeed may they just be signing the form and some other person filling the vote in anyway as to how they have voted.
I agree with arista, postal voting is more open to possible 'interference' from other individuals and may be far from private too.

At a polling station, anyone going there,would not be taking anyone else in to the actual polling booth, or even discussing their voting with anyone else while in the polling station.
With the attendants watching them.
A very big difference.

Anyway while we are heading to leave the EU and it seems no one in govt, or anywhere else, has a clue how to go about that, perhaps across the board at the same time, it could be looked into as to a new voting system for the UK now and some tightening up with photo and signature id required to gain postal votes.

You could say all of that about actually registering to vote. How can you know the people completing the form are who they say they are.

[Livia]

You could say all of that about actually registering to vote. How can you know the people completing the form are who they say they are.

You are right, Jaxie. I'm a qualified and experienced election agent and I've worked with the Electoral Commission and my local electoral services on many elections, European, Parliamentary, County, District and Town. When people apply for a postal vote they have to provide a copy of their signature, as you know. If they cannot and someone signs on their behalf, a reason has to be given and this is usually followed up. People's signatures are checked against the postal vote request and can also be checked against other documentation held by the council. Also, people's requests are often checked against what's called the Marked Register. This is a copy of the electoral roll which is marked as to which voter cast a vote in the last election (obviously it only says whether they voted, not who they voted for). You can see whether this person has voted in the past. If they haven't, then enquiries are made.

There is no fool proof system because fools are so ingenious. But we have in this country one of the best, one of the fairest systems in the world. Of course there are people who think everything's a conspiracy... However, staff in council's electoral services department are really thorough and committed as is the Electoral Commission. I agree with you about the future of postal votes.

[joeysteele]

You could say all of that about actually registering to vote. How can you know the people completing the form are who they say they are.

Well if proper checks are made that would be found out, people registering to vote will have other details, they may be council tenants or the homeowners, they will be registered with energy suppliers.
A simple check can identify that.

However you are missing the point,with a vote at a polling station, you go in not necessarily with your card but your name and address at least.
You cannot have anyone with you in the polling booth, you fill the ballot paper yourself and put it in a sealed box.
You cannot vote again and that vote is done.

A postal vote is done in the home,the point Kizzy and I were making and arista I think too, is that no one is overseeing how that votes is arrived at.
Some people, not you yourself, think it conspiracy theories, just to try to belittle others but answer the question please.
The vote at the polling station for a named person is watched over by those in attendance at that polling station.

'Who' watches over a postal vote being done for anyone in their home,who sees them, or has to sign they have seen that person, vote and sign and seal that ballot themselves.
To some who should know better, I say in a massive difference to the way the polling station vote is done ,no one sees that postal vote done or how it is done at all.
That is a simple fact.

[Livia]

Jaxie... you are not missing any point.

[joeysteele]

Jaxie... you are not missing any point.

Well being an election agent and knowing so much about the voting,answer please who does see the votes cast properly in a postal vote.
Also is the polling station voting not watched to make sure no one shows their vote to anyone else, or interferes or has interference with their vote too.

I was the one who said jaxie was missing the point, I am also aware you know a lot about voting and politics but it is mystifying you cannot see the difference as to how a polling station vote is overseen, unlike a postal vote which is not in any way..

I also think if another member and myself were members you actually had any liking for you would be agreeing and indeed probably making that point yourself too.

Because to me it is clear as day,a polling station vote is watched over at the time and all through it being done, start to finish, a postal vote is open to anything, as no one watches over it at all when it is being done.

That is precisely the point being made and missed,however even more surprisingly and worrying is that it is being missed too by an election agent it seems.
That for sure would worry me especially with postal voting on a very large increase.

[Kizzy]

Jaxie... you are not missing any point.

Could my point be addressed please as you are the resident expert in this scenario too it seems, once the ballots are entrusted to the mail service who is there to ensure they are not tampered with or stolen?

[Livia]

Your claim that if this topic was being covered by people I actually liked instead of you... that's the thing that's mystifying. I have lots of friends on here with whom I don't agree but we can remain civil. We were friends, you and I, until you changed your political allegiance and decided I was your enemy for some reason.

I find your claim that you're worried that an election agent like me is missing YOUR point. Your opinion has nothing whatsoever to do with what's actually true in my professional opinion and I'll thank you not to question my professional opinion until the ink's dry on your degree.

Anyone could walk into a polling station with my polling card and cast a vote. You don't have to take photo ID. It is as open to fraud as postal votes (and proxy votes) are. You can't make anything fool proof, as I've already said, but I'm happy, as a professional, that the system is carefully monitored. No political party is allowed to have anything to do with the postal votes. They can send out the forms so long as their local electoral services is in agreement and has approved the form, but they are not legally entitled to receive them once completed. Saying that postal votes are dangerous is saying that the people who work in electoral services and the Electoral Commission are untrustworthy. You're also assuming that the people in whose name the postal vote is prepared are either stupid or in league with fraudsters. Most people I know take their vote very seriously. What's more, professional people police the system brilliantly. Does fraud sometimes happen? Of course. Is it punished with prison sentences? Yes.

[joeysteele]

Could my point be addressed please as you are the resident expert in this scenario too it seems, once the ballots are entrusted to the mail service who is there to ensure they are not tampered with or stolen?

Also, often it is the disabled who get a postal vote too,who then entrust the posting of that vote by another.
What if that 'other' does not post it.

Are there any checks as to why people have not used a postal vote sent to them if not received back.
Surely if someone wants a postal vote they are usually at least eager to use a vote.

Are there any checks as to why they have not used it,do they wish to continue having postal votes sent if they haven't.

Nothing to do with conspiracy theories, just pointing out the more possible flaws there are as to postal voting and with more and more postal voting now going on, I would guess less checks, if there even are any, being made at all.
However we apparently know nothing Kizzy so are not deemed worthy of a decent answer.

I will tell you this, there are many MPs of all Parties worried as to postal voting, even if election agents are it seems not bothered in the slightest.

[bots]

With respect to the current voting system, singling out postal voting is just so insignificant in the scheme of things. Things like weather affect voting results much more than anything fraudulent that can be achieved, unspotted.

Its not a perfect system, no-one is suggesting it is, but it is still very good.

[Livia]

Could my point be addressed please as you are the resident expert in this scenario too it seems, once the ballots are entrusted to the mail service who is there to ensure they are not tampered with or stolen?

I think I've covered this topic adequately. If you think the Royal Mail is in league with a political party you should contact the police.

[Livia]

With respect to the current voting system, singling out postal voting is just so insignificant in the scheme of things. Things like weather affect voting results much more than anything fraudulent that can be achieved, unspotted.

Its not a perfect system, no-one is suggesting it is, but it is still very good.

Exactly. But I think it's fair to say that if someone else has said what I have said, it would not be being questioned.

[user104658]

If you think the Royal Mail is in league with a political party you should contact the police.


That would be impossible, the Royal Mail will never give up their age-old servitude to Satan himself. They have no time for our petty human politics.

[Vicky.]

The solution is simple...have 2 rounds of voting. Round 1 everyone in. Then round 2 just 2 parties left and see how the votes go

Ooh I like this idea. I tend to vote Labour because I know its always between them and the Tories and I don't want my vote to be 'wasted' If it was like this I could vote how I actually wanted to the first round

[Livia]

That would be impossible, the Royal Mail will never give up their age-old servitude to Satan himself. They have no time for our petty human politics.

I have collected a parcel from my local sorting office and I know this to be true.

[user104658]

Exactly. But I think it's fair to say that if someone else has said what I have said, it would not be being questioned.

Tbf you are an easy target and Kizzy is still on her kiddy gloves so she needs the practice. She's tried Kirk... but let's be honest, she's just not there yet. She needs the softer, subtler, feminine touch of a good wind-up-Livia session:smug:.. Kirk uses his loud voice and it gives her a spook :worry:

[Niamh.]

Ooh I like this idea. I tend to vote Labour because I know its always between them and the Tories and I don't want my vote to be 'wasted' If it was like this I could vote how I actually wanted to the first round

I can never bring myself to vote for either of our two main parties, they may as well be the same thing

[user104658]

I have collected a parcel from my local sorting office and I know this to be true.

They put my wife's new iPhone in the recycle bin. At the house three doors down.

[arista]

The Electoral Commission oversees all elections in the UK and prosecutes wrongdoings when they find them. Fiddling with an election carries a jail sentence. I have faith in them.


I hope more are sent to Jail,
for Corruption

[Livia]

They put my wife's new iPhone in the recycle bin. At the house three doors down.

Blimey, did she get it eventually?

When I worked for the Tories, the MPs office was about 150 metres from the sorting office. He didn't get his post until 3pm at the earliest... ever. But then, it was a Conservative office...

[Vicky.]

I can never bring myself to vote for either of our two main parties, they may as well be the same thing

Same here really...well before Corbyn...but sadly Corbyn has no chance anyway.

Labour and Tories have been very similar for a while now, with the slight exception of Labour being a bit nicer to poorer/working class people. As someone who comes from a working class family (my grandad was a miner and would turn in his grave if I voted Tory :laugh: ) and is not well off myself, Labour is the option for me. IF I was well off and owned my house and stuff, I would probably go for Tory.

[Livia]

I can never bring myself to vote for either of our two main parties, they may as well be the same thing

To be fair, that's a comment that could have come from anyone in any country!

[user104658]

I can never bring myself to vote for either of our two main parties, they may as well be the same thing

Skim off the surface and really they're all the same, sadly. Politics attracts a certain type of person with a certain type of ambition and, at the end of the day, these types of people have the same outlook on life and politics. They just dress it up in slightly different ways. I vote SNP and am largely in favour of Scottish independence because I am generally in favour of devolved politics as much as possible, because the smaller the governed population, the more likely it is that people other than career politicians will have their voice heard and be in a position to make any real impact. I'd see a world of thousands of small city-states working in union, to be honest.

But yes anyway... it's not because I think SNP politicians are any different to Labour or Tory politicians. Sadly they're just more of the same. All of the smaller parties are. All of those who would claim otherwise are too (e.g. Mr Corbyn).

[Niamh.]

Same here really...well before Corbyn...but sadly Corbyn has no chance anyway.

Labour and Tories have been very similar for a while now, with the slight exception of Labour being a bit nicer to poorer/working class people. As someone who comes from a working class family (my grandad was a miner and would turn in his grave if I voted Tory :laugh: ) and is not well off myself, Labour is the option for me. IF I was well off and owned my house and stuff, I would probably go for Tory.

Like I don't even think there's that kind of small difference between our two :laugh:

Sinn fein really are the most different of the bigger parties, they're definitely the most "working class friendly" The problem for them though is shaking off their past associations with the IRA. They really need to get rid of Gerry Adams as their leader because his face will always remind people of that.

To be fair, that's a comment that could have come from anyone in any country!

Very true :laugh:

[user104658]

Blimey, did she get it eventually?

When I worked for the Tories, the MPs office was about 150 metres from the sorting office. He didn't get his post until 3pm at the earliest... ever. But then, it was a Conservative office...
Her provider sent a replacement free of charge because it was (obviously!) never signed for, but the neighbours did eventually bring it to us weeks later, as they had been away and came back to find the delivery card. That's the only reason we ever found out where it had been! Being honest (and really, fearing that the company would be able to track the phone if anyone used it :joker: ) we sent it back to the provider. But I'm pretty sure if those neighbours had just kept it / sold it, no one would ever have known :shrug:. Well done Mr Postman, it was only a £600 phone :joker:.

[Livia]

Her provider sent a replacement free of charge because it was (obviously!) never signed for, but the neighbours did eventually bring it to us weeks later, as they had been away and came back to find the delivery card. That's the only reason we ever found out where it had been! Being honest (and really, fearing that the company would be able to track the phone if anyone used it :joker: ) we sent it back to the provider. But I'm pretty sure if those neighbours had just kept it / sold it, no one would ever have known :shrug:. Well done Mr Postman, it was only a £600 phone :joker:.

You sent it BACK?!?

I'm ordering you an iHalo.

[jaxie]

You are right, Jaxie. I'm a qualified and experienced election agent and I've worked with the Electoral Commission and my local electoral services on many elections, European, Parliamentary, County, District and Town. When people apply for a postal vote they have to provide a copy of their signature, as you know. If they cannot and someone signs on their behalf, a reason has to be given and this is usually followed up. People's signatures are checked against the postal vote request and can also be checked against other documentation held by the council. Also, people's requests are often checked against what's called the Marked Register. This is a copy of the electoral roll which is marked as to which voter cast a vote in the last election (obviously it only says whether they voted, not who they voted for). You can see whether this person has voted in the past. If they haven't, then enquiries are made.

There is no fool proof system because fools are so ingenious. But we have in this country one of the best, one of the fairest systems in the world. Of course there are people who think everything's a conspiracy... However, staff in council's electoral services department are really thorough and committed as is the Electoral Commission. I agree with you about the future of postal votes.

Thanks for clarifying all that Livia. I have a family member who works in a job where they are often out of the country and have used postal voting and I was quite impressed with how it's done with the envelope in an envelope and signature etc as they showed me, though not their vote of course!

[jaxie]

Well if proper checks are made that would be found out, people registering to vote will have other details, they may be council tenants or the homeowners, they will be registered with energy suppliers.
A simple check can identify that.

However you are missing the point,with a vote at a polling station, you go in not necessarily with your card but your name and address at least.
You cannot have anyone with you in the polling booth, you fill the ballot paper yourself and put it in a sealed box.
You cannot vote again and that vote is done.

A postal vote is done in the home,the point Kizzy and I were making and arista I think too, is that no one is overseeing how that votes is arrived at.
Some people, not you yourself, think it conspiracy theories, just to try to belittle others but answer the question please.
The vote at the polling station for a named person is watched over by those in attendance at that polling station.

'Who' watches over a postal vote being done for anyone in their home,who sees them, or has to sign they have seen that person, vote and sign and seal that ballot themselves.
To some who should know better, I say in a massive difference to the way the polling station vote is done ,no one sees that postal vote done or how it is done at all.
That is a simple fact.

You say that people would be found out if not registering to vote themselves as checks would be made and their would be other details like they are council tenants or homeowners, registered for energy and a simple check could verify and yet you fail to see the same can be said for postal voting.

With a polling station you flash a card at people, go and vote you could be anyone really except the card comes in the post to you address. A postal vote also comes to your address, your registered address, the one easily checked as being yours and is returned with a verified signature. I fail to see why you consider this less secure. :shrug:

[Kizzy]

I think I've covered this topic adequately. If you think the Royal Mail is in league with a political party you should contact the police.

I don't think it has, I'm wondering if you read what I put at all, the post wasn't that long, as nowhere has it been addressed :/

'Royal mail' is no longer no longer the organisation it once was therefore I feel as a private venture it is unsuitable for this task as it no longer has the level of impartiality required being owed by shareholders as opposed to the public.

[joeysteele]

You say that people would be found out if not registering to vote themselves as checks would be made and their would be other details like they are council tenants or homeowners, registered for energy and a simple check could verify and yet you fail to see the same can be said for postal voting.

With a poking station you flash a card at people, go and vote you could be anyone really except the card comes in the post to you address. A postal vote also comes to your address, your registered address, the one easily checked as being yours and is returned with a verified signature. I fail to see why you consider this less secure. :shrug:

I said 'if checks were made not 'were'.

However I am not arguing here, I am merely stating that in my view, and I say it again, as my point and a couple of other peoples too maybe.

In my opinion, someone going to a polling station can only get their vote done once, with no one else with them in the booth, or anyone interfering as to their voting as it is watched at the time by the electoral attendants on duty in the polling station.

In a postal vote,a postal vote granted on paper on signature only and not with photo id, that postal vote then done in the home, is not watched as it is in a polling station.

No official is there to observe the voter marking the ballot paper, signing the declaration and sealing the envelope.
Which in my view,'could' leave postal voting open to possible influence or interference from another or indeed others.
Something which could not happen inside an actual polling station.
No one voting in a polling station has their vote seen by anyone else.
A postal vote done in the home can be.

That has been my point all through and it is why I think, rightly or wrongly, postal votes and indeed any voting taken out of a polling station and private booth there with sealed boxes for the completed vote,needs greater scrutiny and security before being granted and issued.
With at least photo id in addition to signature for a postal vote.

I even would not object to having to show id at a polling station either to ensure I am who I am saying I was.

[jaxie]

They put my wife's new iPhone in the recycle bin. At the house three doors down.

I've had them put parcels on the recycle bin before though not someone elses unless that's where the non arrivals went. :laugh: you scare me sometimes TS I am agreeing with you so often lately I'm starting to question myself when I don't!

[Livia]

I don't think it has, I'm wondering if you read what I put at all, the post wasn't that long, as nowhere has it been addressed :/

'Royal mail' is no longer no longer the organisation it once was therefore I feel as a private venture it is unsuitable for this task as it no longer has the level of impartiality required being owed by shareholders as opposed to the public.

Your post doesn't make much sense, but what I'm getting from it is, who oversees a postal vote once it's in the mail system? It is a criminal offence to tamper with the mail in this country and carries stiff penalties just as tampering with a ballot box does. And people don't have to post them, they can ask someone to take them to a polling station and hand them to the polling officer if they're worried that the Royal Mail isn't secure.

If you want to know anything else I might have to start the clock.

[jaxie]

Tbf you are an easy target and Kizzy is still on her kiddy gloves so she needs the practice. She's tried Kirk... but let's be honest, she's just not there yet. She needs the softer, subtler, feminine touch of a good wind-up-Livia session:smug:.. Kirk uses his loud voice and it gives her a spook :worry:

:laugh: :joker:

[Livia]

I've had them put parcels on the recycle bin before though not someone elses unless that's where the non arrivals went. :laugh: you scare me sometimes TS I am agreeing with you so often lately I'm starting to question myself when I don't!

Don't let him lull you into a false sense of security, Jax... that's how he draws people in to his cult.

[user104658]

Don't let him lull you into a false sense of security, Jax... that's how he draws people in to his cult.
Feel like this is a covert admission that you are in my cult :suspect:

[Kizzy]

You say that people would be found out if not registering to vote themselves as checks would be made and their would be other details like they are council tenants or homeowners, registered for energy and a simple check could verify and yet you fail to see the same can be said for postal voting.

With a poking station you flash a card at people, go and vote you could be anyone really except the card comes in the post to you address. A postal vote also comes to your address, your registered address, the one easily checked as being yours and is returned with a verified signature. I fail to see why you consider this less secure. :shrug:

Do you mean a polling station? :blush:

You do not 'flash a card' you are given a polling number this number is on he card and is cross referenced with the registered number they have in the register for your address. You are there in person at your local polling station.

It is less secure as once posted tens of 1000s of votes vanish... it happened regularly last year across the country, I'm surprised nobody chooses to remember this.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-200000-ballot-papers-stolen-by-van-thieves-10213657.html

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/general-election-2015-investigation-reports-9195178

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/11584068/Expats-in-uproar-over-missing-ballot-papers.html

And again during the referendum...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-disenfranchised-expats-denied-eu-referendum-missing-postal-votes-demand-re-run-hundreds-a7103066.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-postal-votes-missing-late-not-received-eu-referendum-electoral-commission-post-a7125711.html

[joeysteele]

I don't think it has, I'm wondering if you read what I put at all, the post wasn't that long, as nowhere has it been addressed :/

'Royal mail' is no longer no longer the organisation it once was therefore I feel as a private venture it is unsuitable for this task as it no longer has the level of impartiality required being owed by shareholders as opposed to the public.

I have had 4 Birthday cards posted this year that never arrived,3 I sent to others and one that someone sent to me.

I still think the mail is as fairly secure but now there is also rarely a regular postman any more,I have 3 different ones at all times of the day every week.
I agree the post is worse now than I can recall it being, through my life.

Maybe when Theresa May and this govt. bring us out of the EU, they could look at our postal service, this is in fact possibly a good chance and time to look at everything and maybe go back to the drawing board on a lot of things across the UK.

[Livia]

Feel like this is a covert admission that you are in my cult :suspect:

TS, you know you don't allows Jews...

[Kizzy]

Your post doesn't make much sense, but what I'm getting from it is, who oversees a postal vote once it's in the mail system? It is a criminal offence to tamper with the mail in this country and carries stiff penalties just as tampering with a ballot box does. And people don't have to post them, they can ask someone to take them to a polling station and hand them to the polling officer if they're worried that the Royal Mail isn't secure.

If you want to know anything else I might have to start the clock.



It makes perfect sense to anyone not attempting to fudge the issue.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier View Post
Tbf you are an easy target and Kizzy is still on her kiddy gloves so she needs the practice. She's tried Kirk... but let's be honest, she's just not there yet. She needs the softer, subtler, feminine touch of a good wind-up-Livia session.. Kirk uses his loud voice and it gives her a spook .


What are you blabbering on about TS?... :fist:

[Livia]

Do you mean a polling station? :blush:

You do not 'flash a card' you are given a polling number this number is on he card and is cross referenced with the registered number they have in the register for your address. You are there in person at your local polling station.

It is less secure as once posted tens of 1000s of votes vanish... it happened regularly last year across the country, I'm surprised nobody chooses to remember this.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-200000-ballot-papers-stolen-by-van-thieves-10213657.html

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/general-election-2015-investigation-reports-9195178

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/11584068/Expats-in-uproar-over-missing-ballot-papers.html

And again during the referendum...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-disenfranchised-expats-denied-eu-referendum-missing-postal-votes-demand-re-run-hundreds-a7103066.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-postal-votes-missing-late-not-received-eu-referendum-electoral-commission-post-a7125711.html

These are problems with the postal service not the Electoral Commission. Don't confuse the two, they are not the same. Someone should take it up with the union...

[Vicky.]

I have NEVER taken my polling card to vote at a polling station...also they have the names and address lists in plain view at ours so technically I could 'be' anyone...I think postal votes are more secure tbh, but there is the issue of the stupid amount of mail (not just votes, mail in general) that go 'missing' with royal mail :S

[Livia]

It makes perfect sense to anyone not attempting to fudge the issue.

What on earth would I have to gain by fudging the issue? I gave my professional opinion. If you don't like the answer doesn't mean what I've stated is untrue. I'm telling you what the law is and the function of electoral services and the Election Commission. But apparently, you know better. Which is funny... because seriously... you don't.

[jaxie]

I said 'if checks were made not 'were'.

However I am not arguing here, I am merely stating that in my view, and I say it again, as my point and a couple of other peoples too maybe.

In my opinion, someone going to a polling station can only get their vote done once, with no one else with them in the booth, or anyone interfering as to their voting as it is watched at the time by the electoral attendants on duty in the polling station.

In a postal vote,a postal vote granted on paper on signature only and not with photo id, that postal vote then done in the home, is not watched as it is in a polling station.

No official is there to observe the voter marking the ballot paper, signing the declaration and sealing the envelope.
Which in my view,'could' leave postal voting open to possible influence or interference from another or indeed others.
Something which could not happen inside an actual polling station.
No one voting in a polling station has their vote seen by anyone else.
A postal vote done in the home can be.

That has been my point all through and it is why I think, rightly or wrongly, postal votes and indeed any voting taken out of a polling station and private booth there with sealed boxes for the completed vote,needs greater scrutiny and security before being granted and issued.
With at least photo id in addition to signature for a postal vote.

I even would not object to having to show id at a polling station either to ensure I am who I am saying I was.

Now I know people watch you at the polling station because it's a fact from Joey, I'll never be able to go there again without hearing the pink panther theme tune in my head. :laugh:

Also a bit worried about all these carers and where they may be stuffing disabled people's votes instead of posting them. :shocked:

Seriously though people at polling stations don't know you from Adam, polling cards don't have a photo ID How can they verify its you and why would they 'watch' you? It's no safer than a postal vote in reality and postal voting would get more people to vote.

[Kizzy]

These are problems with the postal service not the Electoral Commission. Don't confuse the two, they are not the same. Someone should take it up with the union...

Then why entrust postal votes to the postal service if they are not competent?

I'm not confusing the two, I have clearly stated that face to face balloting under the gaze of the electoral commission representatives is my preferred method of voting.

Someone should take what up with which union... and why?

[Livia]

Then why entrust postal votes to the postal service if they are not competent?

I'm not confusing the two, I have clearly stated that face to face balloting under the gaze of the electoral commission representatives is my preferred method of voting.

Someone should take what up with which union... and why?

Enough already.

[Kizzy]

What on earth would I have to gain by fudging the issue? I gave my professional opinion. If you don't like the answer doesn't mean what I've stated is untrue. I'm telling you what the law is and the function of electoral services and the Election Commission. But apparently, you know better. Which is funny... because seriously... you don't.

Being a registered voter I have enough information and intelligence to understand the differing methods of voting and their uses, but if it makes you feel better to act superior in all areas then I won't attempt to take that away from you.

[jaxie]

Do you mean a polling station? :blush:

You do not 'flash a card' you are given a polling number this number is on he card and is cross referenced with the registered number they have in the register for your address. You are there in person at your local polling station.

It is less secure as once posted tens of 1000s of votes vanish... it happened regularly last year across the country, I'm surprised nobody chooses to remember this.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-200000-ballot-papers-stolen-by-van-thieves-10213657.html

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/general-election-2015-investigation-reports-9195178

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/11584068/Expats-in-uproar-over-missing-ballot-papers.html

And again during the referendum...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-disenfranchised-expats-denied-eu-referendum-missing-postal-votes-demand-re-run-hundreds-a7103066.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-postal-votes-missing-late-not-received-eu-referendum-electoral-commission-post-a7125711.html

Yeah I meant polling. I'm on my tablet typing with thumbs and it likes to auto correct the odd word strangely. On occasion I find this amusing so I haven't turned it off. I wasn't trying to initiate relations of any kind.

As Livia has said it is illegal to mess with the mail. I'm fairly sure it's no less secure to post your vote as it is to do it at the local school.

[jaxie]

I have had 4 Birthday cards posted this year that never arrived,3 I sent to others and one that someone sent to me.

I still think the mail is as fairly secure but now there is also rarely a regular postman any more,I have 3 different ones at all times of the day every week.
I agree the post is worse now than I can recall it being, through my life.

Maybe when Theresa May and this govt. bring us out of the EU, they could look at our postal service, this is in fact possibly a good chance and time to look at everything and maybe go back to the drawing board on a lot of things across the UK.

I sent a birthday card and a balloon to a family member who works on a ship that is currently somewhere near New York. Both arrived safely and in time.

[Kizzy]

I have NEVER taken my polling card to vote at a polling station...also they have the names and address lists in plain view at ours so technically I could 'be' anyone...I think postal votes are more secure tbh, but there is the issue of the stupid amount of mail (not just votes, mail in general) that go 'missing' with royal mail :S

There's odd we do, maybe the 'officials' are not at thorough as is suggested?

There is less mail now than ever, so that's not really a bona fide excuse for mail going missing.

[Livia]

Being a registered voter I have enough information and intelligence to understand the differing methods of voting and their uses, but if it makes you feel better to act superior in all areas then I won't attempt to take that away from you.


As a voter you don't have the kind of information I do as an election agent. That is not setting myself up, nor is it knocking anyone down. It's just the way it is. If someone on here was a professional in a certain area, I'd be interested to hear their opinion, I wouldn't get all huffy because they knew something I didn't.

If you want to continue to trip-trap over my bridge... I won't take that away from you.

[Kizzy]

Yeah I meant polling. I'm on my tablet typing with thumbs and it likes to auto correct the odd word strangely. On occasion I find this amusing so I haven't turned it off. I wasn't trying to initiate relations of any kind.

As Livia has said it is illegal to mess with the mail. I'm fairly sure it's no less secure to post your vote as it is to do it at the local school.

Did 200,000 votes go missing from a local school?
Are the 'electoral commission' representatives ( such as Livia) not ever present to manage procedures and guard the ballot boxes?

the two are very different in structure and execution therefore they cannot be 'as secure' as one another can they?

[jaxie]

Feel like this is a covert admission that you are in my cult :suspect:
I just remembered the SNP is between us like a big festering sore. :hee:

[Kizzy]

As a voter you don't have the kind of information I do as an election agent. That is not setting myself up, nor is it knocking anyone down. It's just the way it is. If someone on here was a professional in a certain area, I'd be interested to hear their opinion, I wouldn't get all huffy because they knew something I didn't.

If you want to continue to trip-trap over my bridge... I won't take that away from you.

If you want to set yourself up as a troll I won't take that away from you.

You haven't stated anything that is not already known by every voter in the UK though... what esoteric knowledge do you have? :laugh:
You vote at a station the box is sealed and transported with representatives of the electoral commission... You post your vote and it ends up wherever with whoever, as regularly reported.

[jaxie]

Did 200,000 votes go missing from a local school?
Are the 'electoral commission' representatives ( such as Livia) not ever present to manage procedures and guard the ballot boxes?

the two are very different in structure and execution therefore they cannot be 'as secure' as one another can they?

You can hand them in to the council offices personally if you are worried.

I am now visualising Livia guarding her ballot box with a well honed knife. Is that how it happens?

[bots]

There is so much conjecture its amazing. Whether there is fraud in it or not really doesn't matter as all sides have the same opportunities to be fraudulent, which makes it a self levelling, balanced system. Fraud comes into play when someone gets an unfair advantage over another through fraud, like holding people at gunpoint at the polling station etc. Mountains out of molehills.

[jaxie]

If you want to set yourself up as a troll I won't take that away from you.

You haven't stated anything that is not already known by every voter in the UK though... what esoteric knowledge do you have? :laugh:
You vote at a station the box is sealed and transported with representatives of the electoral commission... You post your vote and it ends up wherever with whoever, as regularly reported.

I thought Livia was pretty clear and concise in her post back on page 4. Maybe a reread? :shrug:

[Kizzy]

There is so much conjecture its amazing. Whether there is fraud in it or not really doesn't matter as all sides have the same opportunities to be fraudulent, which makes it a self levelling, balanced system. Fraud comes into play when someone gets an unfair advantage over another through fraud, like holding people at gunpoint at the polling station etc. Mountains out of molehills.

Are you saying the representatives of the electoral commission have the potential to act fraudulently?.... :eek:

[Kizzy]

You can hand them in to the council offices personally if you are worried.

I am now visualising Livia guarding her ballot box with a well honed knife. Is that how it happens?

Why?... you may as well go cast your vote if you're going to do that :/

[Vicky.]

There's odd we do, maybe the 'officials' are not at thorough as is suggested?

There is less mail now than ever, so that's not really a bona fide excuse for mail going missing.

Maybe..I have never really thought about it before tbh. Didin't even realise this was wrong as its how it as always been done :S

We basically just turn up to the church over the road, give our names and addresses, there are no 'booths' just a kinda stand thing with 2 parts (so 2 people can do theirs at once) then fold and stick into a box. But the people manning the desk have their address/name book in plain view of everyone, and they just tick off whoevers been to vote.

Good thing I have never needed my card as they always go missing by election day :laugh:

[bots]

Are you saying the representatives of the electoral commission have the potential to act fraudulently?.... :eek:

anyone can act fraudulently.

If someone fraudulently moved the goalposts closer together at both ends of the football field, its still a balanced game. If someone alters only one set of posts, its still a balanced game because they change direction at half time ...

Saying that a system is open to fraud is not the same thing as a result being affected

[Kizzy]

I thought Livia was pretty clear and concise in her post back on page 4. Maybe a reread? :shrug:

So there is a representative who checks the votes against the electronic signature copy....that wasn't clarified was it?
Also the method of transportation isn't that reliable, for the reasons I specified earlier backed with proof.

[Kizzy]

anyone can act fraudulently.

If someone fraudulently moved the goalposts closer together at both ends of the football field, its still a balanced game. If someone alters only one set of posts, its still a balanced game because they change direction at half time ...

Saying that a system is open to fraud is not the same thing as a result being affected

If votes go missing then that has the potential to affect the result regardless of your pointless football analogy.

[smudgie]

Maybe..I have never really thought about it before tbh. Didin't even realise this was wrong as its how it as always been done :S

We basically just turn up to the church over the road, give our names and addresses, there are no 'booths' just a kinda stand thing with 2 parts (so 2 people can do theirs at once) then fold and stick into a box. But the people manning the desk have their address/name book in plain view of everyone, and they just tick off whoevers been to vote.

Good thing I have never needed my card as they always go missing by election day :laugh:

IT is not wrong to vote without your polling card Vicky.
All perfectly legal and above board.
Loads of people lose their cards between it arriving and polling d, I used to put ours away for safe keeping and then come the day, forget where I had put them:joker:

[Livia]

Did 200,000 votes go missing from a local school?
Are the 'electoral commission' representatives ( such as Livia) not ever present to manage procedures and guard the ballot boxes?

the two are very different in structure and execution therefore they cannot be 'as secure' as one another can they?

I do not and have never represented the Electoral Commission.

I have never had anything to do with ballot boxes, as a party agent you are not allowed to touch ballots nor tamper with a ballot box.

Best you learn the structures before you comment on their security.

[bots]

If votes go missing then that has the potential to affect the result regardless of your pointless football analogy.

in an election, the only place that fraudulent activity affects results is in marginal seats. Consequently, marginal seats are subject to the highest degree of scrutiny across the whole process by all sides involved. The existing system is very good

[kirklancaster]

anyone can act fraudulently.

If someone fraudulently moved the goalposts closer together at both ends of the football field, its still a balanced game. If someone alters only one set of posts, its still a balanced game because they change direction at half time ...

Saying that a system is open to fraud is not the same thing as a result being affected

:laugh: BRILLIANT.

[Livia]

Are you saying the representatives of the electoral commission have the potential to act fraudulently?.... :eek:

Polling stations are staffed by volunteers approved by your local authority's electoral services department. NOT the Electoral Commission.

Didn't you say that, as a voter, you knew all this stuff?

[Kizzy]

I do not and have never represented the Electoral Commission.

I have never had anything to do with ballot boxes, as a party agent you are not allowed to touch ballots nor tamper with a ballot box.

Best you learn the structures before you comment on their security.

'I've worked with the Electoral Commission and my local electoral services on many elections,'

I see, you have worked with them, not for them.

That is still however their role to oversee the voting procedure as it happens.

[Livia]

'I've worked with the Electoral Commission and my local electoral services on many elections,'

I see, you have worked with them, not for them.

That is still however their role to oversee the voting procedure as it happens.

When you've run out of steam you start with the semantics.

I worked for the Conservative party. It would be a conflict of interest if I also represented the Electoral Commission, don't you think?

[Kizzy]

Polling stations are staffed by volunteers approved by your local authority's electoral services department. NOT the Electoral Commission.

Didn't you say that, as a voter, you knew all this stuff?

Did I mention polling station volunteers?....

[Niamh.]

Stay on topic please people, no getting personal/insulting

[Kizzy]

When you've run out of steam you start with the semantics.

I worked for the Conservative party. It would be a conflict of interest if I also represented the Electoral Commission, don't you think?

I haven't run out of anything, you are labouring (lol) this as it detracts from the issue of postal votes I think.

[Livia]

Did I mention polling station volunteers?....

Oh who knows... you said a lot.

I've given you my professional opinion, which is quite different from representing the Electoral Commission. I don't believe postal votes are any less secure than those cast at a polling station. That's it... I have other things to do today.

[joeysteele]

Now I know people watch you at the polling station because it's a fact from Joey, I'll never be able to go there again without hearing the pink panther theme tune in my head. :laugh:

Also a bit worried about all these carers and where they may be stuffing disabled people's votes instead of posting them. :shocked:

Seriously though people at polling stations don't know you from Adam, polling cards don't have a photo ID How can they verify its you and why would they 'watch' you? It's no safer than a postal vote in reality and postal voting would get more people to vote.

You are twisting my words and you are far more reasonable than that.

Fair enough ridicule if you must, all I am saying is,you have to go to the attendants at the desk to get your ballot paper, you have to have a name and address to do so and/or a polling card.

They do not watch you do your vote, you go into a polling booth and mark your ballot paper, then fold it and put it in a sealed ballot box.

What they would see however is if you talked to anyone as to your vote or if anyone tried to influence you,only one person is allowed in the actual booth.

No one is watching you, just making sure the rules of voting in elections are upheld.

That is not however the case in the home and at the time of someone doing a postal vote.

Anyway you join the ridiculing all you like jaxie.

I think I have made my point, officials are there as a fact in the polling stations, they are not in the home with postal votes,they are also not there to see postal votes going into a letter box, as they are there to see the folded votes going into the sealed ballot box at the polling station.
Simple points and maybe in fact all needs tightening up no matter how people vote anyway.
With photo id at the very least.

And well done with your balloon in the post to a ship, I am glad you were successful as all should be with all posted items.
I merely shared with Kizzy that I had seen mail lost on 4 occasions as to mine sent and sent to me,this year already.

No need at all for any cheapening or ridiculing.
Voting in elections etc; to me is a serious issue and I am sure it is to the vast majority of all concerned.
I would like to believe that all votes are secure, however I do have concerns as to postal votes, that is all I am saying.

[jaxie]

You are twisting my words and you are far more reasonable than that.

Fair enough ridicule if you must, all I am saying is,you have to go to the attendants at the desk to get your ballot paper, you have to have a name and address to do so and/or a polling card.

They do not watch you do your vote, you go into a polling booth and mark your ballot paper, then fold it and put it in a sealed ballot box.

What they would see however is if you talked to anyone as to your vote or if anyone tried to influence you,only one person is allowed in the actual booth.

No one is watching you, just making sure the rules of voting in elections are upheld.

That is not however the case in the home and at the time of someone doing a postal vote.

Anyway you join the ridiculing all you like jaxie.

I think I have made my point, officials are there as a fact in the polling stations, they are not in the home with postal votes,they are also not there to see postal votes going into a letter box, as they are there to see the folded votes going into the sealed ballot box at the polling station.
Simple points and maybe in fact all needs tightening up no matter how people vote anyway.
With photo id at the very least.

And well done with your balloon in the post to a ship, I am glad you were successful as all should be with all posted items.
I merely shared with Kizzy that I had seen mail lost on 4 occasions as to mine sent and sent to me,this year already.

No need at all for any cheapening or ridiculing.
Voting in elections etc; to me is a serious issue and I am sure it is to the vast majority of all concerned.
I would like to believe that all votes are secure, however I do have concerns as to postal votes, that is all I am saying.

I was having a little fun Joey because the idea of being watched sounded funny to me. There is a huge difference between poking a little fun and ridiculing someone. It doesn't have to be so serious all the time. And just because someone has a joke with you doesn't mean you have to take it personally. You saw me poke the TS bear, he didn't get upset! :shrug:

I'm also glad my birthday card and balloon arrived on time as it's nice to hear from the family on your birthday when you are far away from home.

[Kizzy]

Oh who knows... you said a lot.

I've given you my professional opinion, which is quite different from representing the Electoral Commission. I don't believe postal votes are any less secure than those cast at a polling station. That's it... I have other things to do today.

I did sorry to fatigue you ploughing through, the fact remains postal votes areless secure as we have the proof of the hundreds of thousands of missing votes don't we?

[joeysteele]

Anyway I'd like to see Mrs May, do the country a big favour, as well as negotiating us out of the EU, make the UK more democratic and embrace a new voting system for elections now too.
Get all sorted out and 'fair' once and for all.

[Vicky.]

What they would see however is if you talked to anyone as to your vote or if anyone tried to influence you,only one person is allowed in the actual boot

Is this not meant to be allowed?

Gavin asks me each time which one it is he is 'meant' to vote for :laugh:

(he is dyslexic which is why he asks..but they don't know that)

[joeysteele]

Is this not meant to be allowed?

Gavin asks me each time which one it is he is 'meant' to vote for :laugh:

(he is dyslexic which is why he asks..but they don't know that)

You are not usually allowed to discuss voting,however you and he go in as husband and wife so after giving your names,I would guess they would accept that.
All the times I have voted, I have never seen anyone discuss their vote.

I actually think that is fine for anyone to assist like that for someone,if its clearly seen as just assisting and you being a couple.

[Vicky.]

You are not usually allowed to discuss voting,however you and he go in as husband and wife so after giving your names,I would guess they would accept that.
All the times I have voted, I have never seen anyone discuss their vote.

I actually think that is fine for anyone to assist like that for someone,if its clearly seen as just assisting and you being a couple.

I raised a few eyebrows once before when he asked me and then went to mark the wrong one. A yelp of 'not the bloody tory one' later...we left faster than usual and he laughed at my embarrassment all the way home D:

[joeysteele]

I raised a few eyebrows once before when he asked me and then went to mark the wrong one. A yelp of 'not the bloody tory one' later...we left faster than usual and he laughed at my embarrassment all the way home D:

:joker: I'd have love to have witnessed that Vicky,good one. :joker:

Aah that has cheered me up today, thanks for sharing that.

[Kizzy]

I raised a few eyebrows once before when he asked me and then went to mark the wrong one. A yelp of 'not the bloody tory one' later...we left faster than usual and he laughed at my embarrassment all the way home D:

:joker::joker::joker::joker: I had to make sure my son didn't make that mistake this year too

[user104658]

getting personal

:smug:

poke the TS bear


:smug: :smug:


This thread though, getting me all hot and bothered.