Late Voting

All polling stations should stay open 1 hour later during General Elections – the current closing time dates from 2 generations ago when society closed earlier.

Allow optional extensions of no more than 1 hour if there are queues or other impediments to voting (like no ballot papers).

Always resource for 100% turnout. Penny pinching is stupid.

If an extension is required find away of identifying people who have turned up in time, but limit late voting to them. Perhaps "work the line" giving out tokens, or stamp the cards sent through the post.

Why is this idea important?

All polling stations should stay open 1 hour later during General Elections – the current closing time dates from 2 generations ago when society closed earlier.

Allow optional extensions of no more than 1 hour if there are queues or other impediments to voting (like no ballot papers).

Always resource for 100% turnout. Penny pinching is stupid.

If an extension is required find away of identifying people who have turned up in time, but limit late voting to them. Perhaps "work the line" giving out tokens, or stamp the cards sent through the post.

Freedom to opt out

The actual idea of voting implies a transfer of power to the politicians.

 

democracy or this collectivist sham transfers power to one set of CAREER politicians or another and the INDIVIDUAL is left powerless.

While we have freedom to choose certain vital courses of action, like where or how we work, whom we choose to marry etc, the most important liberty of all is the right to opt out – not to be forced to finance a certain policy, not to subscribe to a certain policy.

 

It is this right or liberty which the current party system takes away.  See my website www.camrecon.demon.co.uk .  Liberty is also threatened because party politicians are not free to protect our liberties, which, as Lord Hailsham says on my website was their traditional role, and as they are part of the Executive and looking for promotion do as they are told too often.

The party system comprises a "package" of policies which you accept or reject ENTIRELY. It is this which destroys individual liberty, which is not just about money it is about social choices which are forced upon ius by anti-discriminatory legislation.  some freedom

Unless we separate the Executive from the Commons once again pretence at freedom is just a whitewash. 

Why is this idea important?

The actual idea of voting implies a transfer of power to the politicians.

 

democracy or this collectivist sham transfers power to one set of CAREER politicians or another and the INDIVIDUAL is left powerless.

While we have freedom to choose certain vital courses of action, like where or how we work, whom we choose to marry etc, the most important liberty of all is the right to opt out – not to be forced to finance a certain policy, not to subscribe to a certain policy.

 

It is this right or liberty which the current party system takes away.  See my website www.camrecon.demon.co.uk .  Liberty is also threatened because party politicians are not free to protect our liberties, which, as Lord Hailsham says on my website was their traditional role, and as they are part of the Executive and looking for promotion do as they are told too often.

The party system comprises a "package" of policies which you accept or reject ENTIRELY. It is this which destroys individual liberty, which is not just about money it is about social choices which are forced upon ius by anti-discriminatory legislation.  some freedom

Unless we separate the Executive from the Commons once again pretence at freedom is just a whitewash. 

Vote for prime minister.

A general election should consist of two votes, the first as it stands at the present to elect a local representative to the house of commons and a second to vote for the prime minister who should be standing seperaty from the constituency seats.

Why is this idea important?

A general election should consist of two votes, the first as it stands at the present to elect a local representative to the house of commons and a second to vote for the prime minister who should be standing seperaty from the constituency seats.

Electoral canvass

I've no idea whether the Deputy Prime Minister is still looking at this site. Despite the promised frequent updates, nothing has been heard since 9 July. But just in case………

Each year an electoral canvass is required by law. Forms for completion are delivered to all households which are, or might be, residential. "No change" returns can be done online or by phone. To satisfy the law all others must bear a valid signature. This means processing (and presumably storing) many thousands, even millions, of forms. Reminders must be sent, canvassers must call. A colossal cost.

If the law were changed so that only an initial A5 page was delivered containing a code, then internet returns on a pro forma could supply many of the details, which should then self populate the new register. Spot checks would still be required but manual input would be much reduced.

A phone number would be required for those who preferred the form (and didn't want to download it) plus some canvassing input for "no shows". Substantive telephone returns could not be made due to the risk of error.

Why is this idea important?

I've no idea whether the Deputy Prime Minister is still looking at this site. Despite the promised frequent updates, nothing has been heard since 9 July. But just in case………

Each year an electoral canvass is required by law. Forms for completion are delivered to all households which are, or might be, residential. "No change" returns can be done online or by phone. To satisfy the law all others must bear a valid signature. This means processing (and presumably storing) many thousands, even millions, of forms. Reminders must be sent, canvassers must call. A colossal cost.

If the law were changed so that only an initial A5 page was delivered containing a code, then internet returns on a pro forma could supply many of the details, which should then self populate the new register. Spot checks would still be required but manual input would be much reduced.

A phone number would be required for those who preferred the form (and didn't want to download it) plus some canvassing input for "no shows". Substantive telephone returns could not be made due to the risk of error.

General election voting at polling station only

That the encouragement of voting otherwise than at a polling station should be removed.  In fact it should be impossible to vote other than at a polling station for anyone who is not medically incapable (and not just difficult) of getting to the station.  Being out of the country is just tough.

 

An election, especially if we have fixed terms, is known about well in advance and, if people care, they should make themselves available to vote in person on the day.

Why is this idea important?

That the encouragement of voting otherwise than at a polling station should be removed.  In fact it should be impossible to vote other than at a polling station for anyone who is not medically incapable (and not just difficult) of getting to the station.  Being out of the country is just tough.

 

An election, especially if we have fixed terms, is known about well in advance and, if people care, they should make themselves available to vote in person on the day.

Abolish Elections !

Seriously, abolish Elections.

General Elections that is. I want freedom from short-term top-go management of the economy and politicians who support leaders and policies well past their sell-by dates because they know that if The Leader falls there will be a General Election, and thy too will fall.

Abolish crude system where an MP elected with a majority of 1 in a constituency where the vote was split 3 ways and turnout was low, has exactly the same weight as one with a clear absolute majority of the registered electorate.

Make votes cast against a guaranteed winner count for something.

Give supporters of a surefire winning party motivation to turn out or stay at home.

Here's how it works.

An MP elected with over 50% of the Registered Electorate is elected for 5 years.

An MP elected with 50% of the Votes Cast, but less than 50% of the Registered Electorate, is elected for 4 years.

An MP elected with less than 50% of the Votes Cast, for example where the vote is a Split Vote, is elected for 3 years,

In each calendar year there is a set Planned Election Day when MPs whose number of years is up see their constituents get another vote.  Usuallt this will be about the same time of year, but circumstances may make it sensible to change the date – floods, storms, volcanic ash, Olympics.

This way MPs who barely scape into Parliament can only claim a mandate for 3 years, ones who clearly represent their constituents can carry on for a full 5 years.  After each Mini-Election it would be clear if the previous Government still had a working majority.

Governments would change gradually, rather than do damaging full 180-degree turns every few years.

Voters would longer be afraid of voting the way they really want to. They might support a Party but loathe the local Candidate – today they vote for a candidate they loath because they don't want the other party to run the Country. In future they might be confident that whatever the result, the Government will not change in the next 12 months, allowing Local Voters to apply pressure to their Local Party to choose a candidate with Local Support rather than have a narrow clique of activists and Head Office impose a swivel-eyed idealogue.

In a typical year about 200 seats would be up for grabs, rather than the full 600-650. Poorly performing MPs and unpopular ones would soon get the message and work harder to represent their public. A strength of this idea is simplicity – apart from length of tenure, all MPs are equal – there are no fractional or weighted votes.

And if a Government totally fouled up and was unable to govern, there is nothing to stop a General Election being called, it just would not be routine and automatic. 3 years later gradualism would re-assert itself.

Make MPs more responive, stop abrupt policy reversals every 4 or 5 years. Elect MPs for variable terms.

Why is this idea important?

Seriously, abolish Elections.

General Elections that is. I want freedom from short-term top-go management of the economy and politicians who support leaders and policies well past their sell-by dates because they know that if The Leader falls there will be a General Election, and thy too will fall.

Abolish crude system where an MP elected with a majority of 1 in a constituency where the vote was split 3 ways and turnout was low, has exactly the same weight as one with a clear absolute majority of the registered electorate.

Make votes cast against a guaranteed winner count for something.

Give supporters of a surefire winning party motivation to turn out or stay at home.

Here's how it works.

An MP elected with over 50% of the Registered Electorate is elected for 5 years.

An MP elected with 50% of the Votes Cast, but less than 50% of the Registered Electorate, is elected for 4 years.

An MP elected with less than 50% of the Votes Cast, for example where the vote is a Split Vote, is elected for 3 years,

In each calendar year there is a set Planned Election Day when MPs whose number of years is up see their constituents get another vote.  Usuallt this will be about the same time of year, but circumstances may make it sensible to change the date – floods, storms, volcanic ash, Olympics.

This way MPs who barely scape into Parliament can only claim a mandate for 3 years, ones who clearly represent their constituents can carry on for a full 5 years.  After each Mini-Election it would be clear if the previous Government still had a working majority.

Governments would change gradually, rather than do damaging full 180-degree turns every few years.

Voters would longer be afraid of voting the way they really want to. They might support a Party but loathe the local Candidate – today they vote for a candidate they loath because they don't want the other party to run the Country. In future they might be confident that whatever the result, the Government will not change in the next 12 months, allowing Local Voters to apply pressure to their Local Party to choose a candidate with Local Support rather than have a narrow clique of activists and Head Office impose a swivel-eyed idealogue.

In a typical year about 200 seats would be up for grabs, rather than the full 600-650. Poorly performing MPs and unpopular ones would soon get the message and work harder to represent their public. A strength of this idea is simplicity – apart from length of tenure, all MPs are equal – there are no fractional or weighted votes.

And if a Government totally fouled up and was unable to govern, there is nothing to stop a General Election being called, it just would not be routine and automatic. 3 years later gradualism would re-assert itself.

Make MPs more responive, stop abrupt policy reversals every 4 or 5 years. Elect MPs for variable terms.

Changes to the way Parliament is Elected (RPA)

Participation in our democratic processes has been declining for decades.  The most obvious sign of this is the low turnout at elections, but the low participation in the whole process, from attendances at public meetings to membership of politicval organisations to people standing as candidates, is also a cause for concern.

The question is why are people not engaged when clearly they have concerns.  I think the answer is two-fold.

1.  People do not thinking they can change anything (i.e. their vote does not count).

2. People think that it does not matter to them who represents them as 'they are all the same',.

I seek to address the first point.

Most of us live in safe seats where the result of an election is known in advance.  Here the argument that an individual vote does not matter is valid.  The way to get round this is through a form of proportional representation where each vote really matters.

I would suggest that the next Parliament is elected using the d'Hondt method currently used for the Eurpean elections as people as familiar with it. However I would like to see one small change to this system.

At the moment the parties list their candidates in order.  What I would like to see is a seperate ballot paper where the electors can also vote for up to the number of candidates that there are seats available.  The order within the parties will therefore be determined by the voters.

This would enable a voter to express their disapproval of the behaviour or views of a candidate without having to vote against the party they support.  It would also enable all voters to express their views on who should be the representatives of all parties.

Why is this idea important?

Participation in our democratic processes has been declining for decades.  The most obvious sign of this is the low turnout at elections, but the low participation in the whole process, from attendances at public meetings to membership of politicval organisations to people standing as candidates, is also a cause for concern.

The question is why are people not engaged when clearly they have concerns.  I think the answer is two-fold.

1.  People do not thinking they can change anything (i.e. their vote does not count).

2. People think that it does not matter to them who represents them as 'they are all the same',.

I seek to address the first point.

Most of us live in safe seats where the result of an election is known in advance.  Here the argument that an individual vote does not matter is valid.  The way to get round this is through a form of proportional representation where each vote really matters.

I would suggest that the next Parliament is elected using the d'Hondt method currently used for the Eurpean elections as people as familiar with it. However I would like to see one small change to this system.

At the moment the parties list their candidates in order.  What I would like to see is a seperate ballot paper where the electors can also vote for up to the number of candidates that there are seats available.  The order within the parties will therefore be determined by the voters.

This would enable a voter to express their disapproval of the behaviour or views of a candidate without having to vote against the party they support.  It would also enable all voters to express their views on who should be the representatives of all parties.

voluntary electoral registration

Remove all compulsion to register as an elector, return to the older basis that registration is a matter of individual positive choice (provided one is eligible). Incidentally make the register of electors completely secret (except of course for public officers in the exercise of the electoral duties) so that it cannot be used for any other purpose.

Why is this idea important?

Remove all compulsion to register as an elector, return to the older basis that registration is a matter of individual positive choice (provided one is eligible). Incidentally make the register of electors completely secret (except of course for public officers in the exercise of the electoral duties) so that it cannot be used for any other purpose.

Allow electronic voting in trade union executive ballots

The idea

Allow all trade union members who wish the ability to vote for members of their executive bodies by means of an electronic vote. Currently all votes must be postal.

 

The blocking legislation

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/TradeUnions/Tradeunionsintheworkplace/DG_179274

Balloting trade union members

When it comes to determining the method of selecting individuals to to fill the most senior positions in trade unions, the law requires a postal election to be held.

With few exceptions, there must be elections by ballot for the following senior positions in a trade union:

  • member of the executive
  • other positions where the person holding the position is automatically a member of the executive
  • president
  • general secretary

If you go to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidated) Act 1992 at:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1992/ukpga_19920052_en_1

and scroll down to chapter 51 paragraph 4 you will read:

4)So far as is reasonably practicable, every person who is entitled to vote at the election must—

(a)have sent to him by post, at his home address or another address which he has requested the trade union in writing to treat as his postal address, a voting paper which either lists the candidates at the election or is accompanied by a separate list of those candidates; and

(b)be given a convenient opportunity to vote by post

Why is this idea important?

The idea

Allow all trade union members who wish the ability to vote for members of their executive bodies by means of an electronic vote. Currently all votes must be postal.

 

The blocking legislation

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/TradeUnions/Tradeunionsintheworkplace/DG_179274

Balloting trade union members

When it comes to determining the method of selecting individuals to to fill the most senior positions in trade unions, the law requires a postal election to be held.

With few exceptions, there must be elections by ballot for the following senior positions in a trade union:

  • member of the executive
  • other positions where the person holding the position is automatically a member of the executive
  • president
  • general secretary

If you go to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidated) Act 1992 at:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1992/ukpga_19920052_en_1

and scroll down to chapter 51 paragraph 4 you will read:

4)So far as is reasonably practicable, every person who is entitled to vote at the election must—

(a)have sent to him by post, at his home address or another address which he has requested the trade union in writing to treat as his postal address, a voting paper which either lists the candidates at the election or is accompanied by a separate list of those candidates; and

(b)be given a convenient opportunity to vote by post

Restore Public Confidence In The Law

To Repeal whatever legislation is neccessary to remove the law-making powers from the select few in sitting in parliament (or in the case of Wales, the Welsh Assembly), and to put decisions for accepting any new legislation, or repealing any existing legislation, to the public vote.
The decision of said vote could be used as the decision to enact, or repeal, said legislation for a nominated period of time (such as ten years) before said legislation can again be put to public vote. Forums such as this could be used to choose the laws to be voted on, and the votes could be held simultaneously to the general or local authority elections.

Why is this idea important?

To Repeal whatever legislation is neccessary to remove the law-making powers from the select few in sitting in parliament (or in the case of Wales, the Welsh Assembly), and to put decisions for accepting any new legislation, or repealing any existing legislation, to the public vote.
The decision of said vote could be used as the decision to enact, or repeal, said legislation for a nominated period of time (such as ten years) before said legislation can again be put to public vote. Forums such as this could be used to choose the laws to be voted on, and the votes could be held simultaneously to the general or local authority elections.

Voting

Governments complain about low turnouts, why?

We always vote on a thursday when most people are at work.

Why can you not change the law so that all general election votes are done on a sat and sun.

 

Why is this idea important?

Governments complain about low turnouts, why?

We always vote on a thursday when most people are at work.

Why can you not change the law so that all general election votes are done on a sat and sun.

 

VOTING RIGHTS FOR EXPATS

This is a fundemental question of 21st century human rights that I pose to the new UK Government, why should we as British citizens be deprived of our right to vote after 15 years of living abroad. There are millions of us who could not vote during the last General Election. Those of us who live in EU countries only have the right to vote in Council and European elections in the country's we live or work in, we are disinfranchised for all other elections.

I count greatly on the Deputy Prime Minister to bring this question to the forefront. In France for example, French citizens living abroad never lose their right to vote. I think this question is very important in view of the future UK electoral reform. To be deprived of voting rights in one of the most democratic country's in the world is no longer acceptable.

We are many expats who have the same idea. We are trying to organise ourselves throughout Europe , and afterwards globaly to no longer be second class citizens.

The UK gave voting rights to women far before the majority of EU nations, so why does the UK deprive us as expats to have our say in national politics.

For EU expats there are only two choices, voting in the EU for all elections in our country of residence or keeping our right to vote in all UK elections except for Council and European Elections.

Thank you for taking this into consideration.

Lesley Joines

lesley.joines@yahoo.fr

Why is this idea important?

This is a fundemental question of 21st century human rights that I pose to the new UK Government, why should we as British citizens be deprived of our right to vote after 15 years of living abroad. There are millions of us who could not vote during the last General Election. Those of us who live in EU countries only have the right to vote in Council and European elections in the country's we live or work in, we are disinfranchised for all other elections.

I count greatly on the Deputy Prime Minister to bring this question to the forefront. In France for example, French citizens living abroad never lose their right to vote. I think this question is very important in view of the future UK electoral reform. To be deprived of voting rights in one of the most democratic country's in the world is no longer acceptable.

We are many expats who have the same idea. We are trying to organise ourselves throughout Europe , and afterwards globaly to no longer be second class citizens.

The UK gave voting rights to women far before the majority of EU nations, so why does the UK deprive us as expats to have our say in national politics.

For EU expats there are only two choices, voting in the EU for all elections in our country of residence or keeping our right to vote in all UK elections except for Council and European Elections.

Thank you for taking this into consideration.

Lesley Joines

lesley.joines@yahoo.fr

Protect the secret ballot, restrict postal voting

In the polling station the timid voter is protected from interference by the supervising officer, who makes sure that noone but the voter sees the mark on the ballot paper.  With a postal vote there is no such protection.  The household or community bully can insist on seeing the vote made.  It is totally inconsistent for secrecy to be enforced in one case and left to chance in the other.  The  wide distribution of postal votes to all who request them makes things easy for those who would bully or bribe in order to sway the votes of others.  The precious principle of the secret ballot, established in the nineteenth century only after much struggle,  is in practice now abandoned.     The previous regulations restricting postal votes should be restored.  If this leads to lower turnout, so be it.  Better a low turnout than a corrupt result.

Why is this idea important?

In the polling station the timid voter is protected from interference by the supervising officer, who makes sure that noone but the voter sees the mark on the ballot paper.  With a postal vote there is no such protection.  The household or community bully can insist on seeing the vote made.  It is totally inconsistent for secrecy to be enforced in one case and left to chance in the other.  The  wide distribution of postal votes to all who request them makes things easy for those who would bully or bribe in order to sway the votes of others.  The precious principle of the secret ballot, established in the nineteenth century only after much struggle,  is in practice now abandoned.     The previous regulations restricting postal votes should be restored.  If this leads to lower turnout, so be it.  Better a low turnout than a corrupt result.

All British Citizens in Europe to have the vote for LIFE

Firstly – All British Citizens in Europe should have the right to vote in the UK  Elections as a RIGHT for life.  This has been debated for years.  Francis Maude in October 2007 (in the Riviera Reporter) siad that the next Conservative Governemnt should review this issue.  The Blair Government placed a time limit of 15 years, reducing it from 20 years.  But even if such an argument ever held any justice (which it did not) it most certainly does not now.

Secondly – the annual confirmation of this right should be reduced to a simple pre- stamped postcard.  The present multi page form is absolutely stupid and puts everyone off the process unless you are very determined. 

Thirdly – the current UK constituency sytem is a bit daft for Europe based citizens and does not appeal to them.  A first stage towards  change would be the institution of a Minister for the European based Citizen (the MEC).

Why is this idea important?

Firstly – All British Citizens in Europe should have the right to vote in the UK  Elections as a RIGHT for life.  This has been debated for years.  Francis Maude in October 2007 (in the Riviera Reporter) siad that the next Conservative Governemnt should review this issue.  The Blair Government placed a time limit of 15 years, reducing it from 20 years.  But even if such an argument ever held any justice (which it did not) it most certainly does not now.

Secondly – the annual confirmation of this right should be reduced to a simple pre- stamped postcard.  The present multi page form is absolutely stupid and puts everyone off the process unless you are very determined. 

Thirdly – the current UK constituency sytem is a bit daft for Europe based citizens and does not appeal to them.  A first stage towards  change would be the institution of a Minister for the European based Citizen (the MEC).

Change in voting

I would like to see a change in the law that says you do not need to be British to vote in elections, all you have to do is register. I cannot think of any other country that would allow foreigners to vote in its elections.

Why is this idea important?

I would like to see a change in the law that says you do not need to be British to vote in elections, all you have to do is register. I cannot think of any other country that would allow foreigners to vote in its elections.

tighter regulation of postal voting

Postal voting should not be available on demand.  I am not well informed about the details of existing regulations, but  — basing my views on newspaper reports and anecdotal evidence — I believe that the current system is being abused.

I think most of us would agree that the institution of the secret ballot is one of the great achievements of British democracy.  It gave (gives) women and subordinates (including children over the age of 18) in patriarchal households the freedom to express their political preferences free from interference and coercion.  As I understand the current system, it is now possible for postal ballots to be obtained, on demand, for entire households.  If this is indeed the case, I fail to see how one can guarantee freedom from coercion for all members of a household.  If the ballot is not secret, then freedom and democracy are diminished.

Of course I agree that absentee ballots should be available for people who are unavoidably out of the country on polling day.  The same applies to students living away from home, people who are housebound or who know they will be unable, for whatever provable reason, to go to their local polling station on election day.  But I am convinced that people should not be allowed to use postal votes simply because they want to.  The risks are simply too great.

If it transpires that I am misinformed about current regulations, I apologise for wasting your time. 

Why is this idea important?

Postal voting should not be available on demand.  I am not well informed about the details of existing regulations, but  — basing my views on newspaper reports and anecdotal evidence — I believe that the current system is being abused.

I think most of us would agree that the institution of the secret ballot is one of the great achievements of British democracy.  It gave (gives) women and subordinates (including children over the age of 18) in patriarchal households the freedom to express their political preferences free from interference and coercion.  As I understand the current system, it is now possible for postal ballots to be obtained, on demand, for entire households.  If this is indeed the case, I fail to see how one can guarantee freedom from coercion for all members of a household.  If the ballot is not secret, then freedom and democracy are diminished.

Of course I agree that absentee ballots should be available for people who are unavoidably out of the country on polling day.  The same applies to students living away from home, people who are housebound or who know they will be unable, for whatever provable reason, to go to their local polling station on election day.  But I am convinced that people should not be allowed to use postal votes simply because they want to.  The risks are simply too great.

If it transpires that I am misinformed about current regulations, I apologise for wasting your time. 

Allow charities/pressure groups to campaign at elections

Current electoral and charity law mean that while a pressure group can spend most years issuing press releases about whether politicians are doing a good or bad job of protecting children, or wildlife, or whatever, once an election is called they are bound by all sorts of rules, spending restrictions and red tape.

This is completely undemocratic – the one time it is most useful to be informed by indepenent commentators and analysts that, (say) Labour has better housing policies than the others, or the Liberal Democrats are the greenest of the main parties, or the Conservatives are most likely to cut red tape for small businesses, is when you actually get a chance to choose which one you are to be represented by.

Clearly it is important to prevent bodies who are very closely allied to one particular party to effectviely breach election spending limits, but this law has spread from groups in that position to those who are determinedly non-party political and independent, and who are rigorous in their analysis of each parties positions.

Why is this idea important?

Current electoral and charity law mean that while a pressure group can spend most years issuing press releases about whether politicians are doing a good or bad job of protecting children, or wildlife, or whatever, once an election is called they are bound by all sorts of rules, spending restrictions and red tape.

This is completely undemocratic – the one time it is most useful to be informed by indepenent commentators and analysts that, (say) Labour has better housing policies than the others, or the Liberal Democrats are the greenest of the main parties, or the Conservatives are most likely to cut red tape for small businesses, is when you actually get a chance to choose which one you are to be represented by.

Clearly it is important to prevent bodies who are very closely allied to one particular party to effectviely breach election spending limits, but this law has spread from groups in that position to those who are determinedly non-party political and independent, and who are rigorous in their analysis of each parties positions.

Make voting at general elections secret.

The law should be amended to make our votes secret by removing the numbers from the reverse side of the ballot papers which are presently traceable to our name on the electoral role.

Let our votes be secret and be seen to be secret.

 

Clifford Collins.

Why is this idea important?

The law should be amended to make our votes secret by removing the numbers from the reverse side of the ballot papers which are presently traceable to our name on the electoral role.

Let our votes be secret and be seen to be secret.

 

Clifford Collins.

Elections for Chief Constables

Accountability needs to be brought in for the UK Police forces. Chief Constables should be publicly elected as they are in the USA.

If Chief Constables are not doing their job, there should be a way of removing them.

Why is this idea important?

Accountability needs to be brought in for the UK Police forces. Chief Constables should be publicly elected as they are in the USA.

If Chief Constables are not doing their job, there should be a way of removing them.

Restrictions on 16 and 17 year olds voting

That the restriction on 16 and 17 year olds voting in all elections should be removed. It is essentially taxation without representation. The current status that 16 and 17 year olds can serve in the armed forces and pay tax yet they their opinions are not represented are fundamentally against democratic rights.

Why is this idea important?

That the restriction on 16 and 17 year olds voting in all elections should be removed. It is essentially taxation without representation. The current status that 16 and 17 year olds can serve in the armed forces and pay tax yet they their opinions are not represented are fundamentally against democratic rights.

That who ever comes in third in Elections can not be Deputy Prime Minister

 

How can it be fair to have who ever comes in third in the Elections, become Deputy Prime Minister, when they may only win 55 seats and how is that democracy.

 

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

 

How can it be fair to have who ever comes in third in the Elections, become Deputy Prime Minister, when they may only win 55 seats and how is that democracy.

 

 

 

 

Repeal of the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002

The basis of this idea is to repeal the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002, which exempts the selection of candidates by political parties from sex discrimination laws.  Repealing this law would restore full sex discrimination legsialtion to the selection of candidates for elections by political parties.

Why is this idea important?

The basis of this idea is to repeal the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002, which exempts the selection of candidates by political parties from sex discrimination laws.  Repealing this law would restore full sex discrimination legsialtion to the selection of candidates for elections by political parties.