[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jaxie

That's the way to change things!

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]

Originally Posted by Livia

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]

Originally Posted by arista

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]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

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]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

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]

Originally Posted by 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

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by arista

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]

Originally Posted by 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

They can arista, I agree.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by 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

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]

Originally Posted by 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

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

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]

Originally Posted by 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?

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

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

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]

Originally Posted by jaxie

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]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

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?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Ask them?

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]

Originally Posted by jaxie

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]

Originally Posted by Livia

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.