In Australia You Get A $20 Fine If You Dont Vote I Think This Should Happen Here What Do Other Abs Think?

[gordiescotland1]

With the importance of the referendum coming up in Scotland every vote is critical and I strongly believe that this should happen in the UK with postal votes available for people who cant make it to the polling station what do abers think ?

[New Judge]

Sorry, didn't provide the link to the electoral Commission's report:

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/164609/Electoral-fraud-review-final-report.pdf

[Svejk]

the Returning Officer for Tower Hamlets was interviewed about electoral fraud after the last election there.
He said there wasn't 'too much' fraud and intimidation 'only' took place at a couple of polling stations. I do hope there's a new one in place before the next election.

[Svejk]

And re. the OP. No, only people who take some interest in politics and think voting worthwhile should vote.

[ludwig]

// He said there wasn't 'too much' fraud //

Just the right amount then.

[Old_Geezer]

I think it is yet another money grabbing scheme by the government. One has as much right not to vote as to vote and I wish folk would stop encouraging the elites to enact more and more oppression/abuse on decent citizens. It is not for one individual to force their will on another just to give the bully an ego boost or whatever. It is a bad thing to do.

[Hypognosis]

A failure to vote is, in effect, a vote in favour of the eventual winner. Rather like a grammatical double-negative, it is a failure to negate part of the winner's majority.

(I would like to see majority figures carry weight in parliamentary votes but talk of 'block vote system' would likely kybosh that!)

I am in favour of something like the Australian fines system although I am likely to fall foul of it myself, due to unpredictable bouts of debility.

This prompts me to believe that it will descend into a morass of 'sicknote' type claims would snarl up the system and consume GPs' time in validating claims, likely costing more to administrate than it draws in fines, leaving its 'value' to be assessed solely in the net effect of boosting turnout into to 80s-90s%.

[boxtops]

If you force people to vote, those who don't really care will just tick the first box they see - it won't be any better outcome. Postal votes are already there for people who aren't available on polling day - I've got one, so has my OH.

[whiskeryron]

well said methyl, I think that voting should be mandatory. I would go further & suggest that everyone should have proper representation. Usually the amount of people voting for other than the declared winner amounts to more than the winner polled if you can understand what I mean.

[RATTER15]

How would you know who to vote for? I suppose you just go for the one that is better than lying than the others or maybe the one that isn't so good at lying? better chance of the truth I suppose.

[New Judge]

They are not only available for those not available on polling day, boxtops. The last government introduced measures to make them available to anybody who wants one. And it is that that has led to much of the fraud I mentioned.

[Hypognosis]

@boxtops,

the trouble for me is that I don't know if I'm going to be ill until after I've woken up, on the day.

If their was a health test for the postal vote, I would likely fail that, because it would (likely) happen on one of the less-bad days. I don't claim any benefits and I'd likely fail any ATOS tests, or else totally shaft myself by being to knackered to show up. Complete no-win situation, for me. Election fines would just be rubbing it in…

[dzug2]

..Of course if you don't vote then you cannot complain ! ..

a total non-sequitur - of course you can, and do.

In Australia it leads to the 'donkey vote' - people just vote for the top of the list. If it's in alphabetical order (it used to be) the temptation for politicians to change their name to Aaaardvark must be great

[agchristie]

Would fining people be more valuable to democracy than conducting an extensive survey as to why folk don't vote? People are tired of a lack of trust and policies which are weak.

What if there are too many concerns about ANY candidate standing in your area? Should you be forced to vote for something you don't believe in?

[heathfield]

It is my democratic right not to vote if I so wish. Why should anyone take away this, my democratic right?

[youngmafbog]

No, but dont then complain if things dont go your way.

[youngmafbog]

Thanks you NJ, very informative post, although I suppose not very surprising in its findings.

[Old_Geezer]

A decision not to vote is not a vote in favour of the eventual winner. That occurs when you put a cross next to the name of the eventual winner. A decision not to vote is a vote that none of the alternatives were considered a worthy option worth encouraging. It can also be a vote against the existing system where one is expected to choose someone to help dictate what you have to comply with, for the next few years, rather than being given a direct say on the issues.

[Hypognosis]

@dzug2

//In Australia it leads to the 'donkey vote' - //

Good old Don. Is he still tilting at windmills?

@O_G

Sometimes I have to type a nonsense reply in order to persuade others to set out the more true state of affairs. ;-)

Perhaps I should have added the words "in effect" to what I said about the act of not voting?

You are correct that non-turnout is a valid statement about what that constituency makes of the candidates offered to it. In which case, I should modify my 'block vote in parliament' proposition to be (majority * turnout%) so that the majorities are scaled accordingly.

The idea is to stop MPs indulging in the "pairing off" system at divisions, as each constituency will carry a unique 'weight'. No one will be able to tell who cancels out whom and every member will have to show up for even the less contentious bills.

Election majorities should count for something in the day to day working of the house, I feel.

[Hypognosis]

Don Quixote / Don-key voté? Oh, never mind.

Family only. No flowers, please.

[Hypognosis]

Easy fix for forced voters who pick the first name on the ballot paper: -

Just put H.M. Queen's name as the first line. If they can't be @rsed to vote then they are clearly staunch Royalists.

It would be fun if General Election ballot papers had both the "none of the above" option and a "restore the monarchy" option, just to see what happens.