Re:postal voting

[johnofgwent]

It appears to be the usual catfighting -

Lefty - The postal vote is the stuff of dreams
Righty - The polling booth is the stuff of dreams
Completely mad folk - Online voting is the most secure (truly laughable btw - have a look at the US election watchdog)

The most secure way is a cross between mail and polling booths, as both can be easily manipulated in a huge number of ways.

If I had my way, every election or referendum around the world would be policed with a non-partisan, independent group of poll watchers, and ballot count watchers from a huge cross section of countries, and locals and people from around the constituent country too.

Any irregularities would involve a full recount by hand or a rerun of that election in the local areas it's found in, no matter who causes it.

Any countries that block or that don't get the full certification of the group immediately don't get considered a democracy, be they America, or Zambia or Merseyside.. 

I think that would be a good idea, as well as an election security stress testing framework, like the EU bank stress testing, to test the reliability and robustness of the voting procedyres, with a minimum standard imposed.

This has been Dynamo's recommendation of the day.

What were we talking about again? Culture growing on toilets..well I tried growing some watercress on mine but.. 😝

Oh hang on
You left off
"IT Consultants: Online Voting is a spiffing idea (away from camera whispers 'and I'll make billions from the backdoor voterigging API')

[Borg Refinery]

It appears to be the usual catfighting -

Lefty - The postal vote is the stuff of dreams
Righty - The polling booth is the stuff of dreams
Completely mad folk - Online voting is the most secure (truly laughable btw - have a look at the US election watchdog)

The most secure way is a cross between mail and polling booths, as both can be easily manipulated in a huge number of ways.

If I had my way, every election or referendum around the world would be policed with a non-partisan, independent group of poll watchers, and ballot count watchers from a huge cross section of countries, and locals and people from around the constituent country too.

Any irregularities would involve a full recount by hand or a rerun of that election in the local areas it's found in, no matter who causes it.

Any countries that block or that don't get the full certification of the group immediately don't get considered a democracy, be they America, or Zambia or Merseyside.. 

I think that would be a good idea, as well as an election security stress testing framework, like the EU bank stress testing, to test the reliability and robustness of the voting procedyres, with a minimum standard imposed.

This has been Dynamo's recommendation of the day.

What were we talking about again? Culture growing on toilets..well I tried growing some watercress on mine but.. 😝

[cromwell]

Mod Notice
Topic spilt again from concession speech to postal votes to 3rd referendum and further split in to who pays for pensions

[Thomas]

Deppity dawg will be along soon to tell us how things are in geordieland , and how the geordies think culture is something that grows on their outside toilet seats.

apart from that dyno join  in .

[Borg Refinery]

They say beware of greeks bearing gifts.

Hey! I'm right here. 

Would you like a free pen? It doesn't have fast dryi'g invisible ink..I promise (snickers)

[Thomas]

As part of its manifesto, published today (November 21), Labour pledged to leave the state pension at 66 and not to increase it in the future. It would also review it for physically demanding jobs.

It also promised to maintain the triple lock, ensuring the state pension continues to increase each year in line with the highest of inflation, earnings or 2.5 per cent.

But many pension providers have called out the party after it failed to mention the impact this policy would have on taxpayers in its costings document.

Tom Selby, senior analyst at AJ Bell said freezing the state pension age at 66 was a "gargantuan promise" from Labour which would have "enormous ramifications" for those affected, society as a whole and long-term government spending.

Mr Selby said: "It is incredible that the impact this will have on taxpayers doesn't appear in the policy costings.

https://www.ftadviser.com/pensions/2019/11/21/providers-warn-of-labour-s-gargantuan-pension-plans/

[Javert]

i have never said or hinted at any of this..

Says the person who said it in 2 posts on this page.

[cromwell]

What I mean is that I have spoken to people (I don't think on this forum but elsewhere) who openly said that they didn't care if the whole UK economy was trashed and everybody lost their jobs as it would be worth it to leave the EU, and they would be ok as they had their pension already.

I also remember the infamous yougov poll which reported that more than half of Tory voters would think Brexit was still worth it even if it meant their children or someone from their family losing their job.

I'm not claiming that you are like that.

No I didn't think you were but in the past when thatcher came to power it wasn't what I wanted nor approved of,I thought so much she did a disaster but had to put up with it ,that's how votes go sometimes.

Nobody is denying anybody complaining that brexit will be a disaster,it's been the persistent attempts to overturn the result.

As has been said the time for that is from January next year and  the campaigning could start,perhaps if the result had been respected and implemented instead of this four year trench warfare  your prediction that so many were no longer in favour would've meant you might now be on the road to another vote.

[johnofgwent]

It's not secure unless you are in the privacy of a voting booth.
Unless no one else can see what you vote.

OK so, if we've finished being distracted by pensions and can come back to voting mechanisms ...
Until Blair, postal voting was freely available to anyone who told the electoral registration office at their council that it was either difficult to attend in person at a polling station, or difficult to predict some time in advance that they would be able to attend. As I have often pointed out, as an IT freelancer working at client sites for long periods and needing to be able to drop everything and roll to a client at the drop of a hat, it was the woman in charge of the electoral registration office at Newport who pointed out to me, while John Major was still in office, that the vagaries of my job ENTITLED me to a postal vote. Which I took up.
To reiterate, the scheme at that time made it crystal clear that anyone who for any reason would face difficulties in physically presenting themselves at a polling station during its opening hours was welcome to either apply for a postal vote, or appoint a proxy to vote in their stead. And to deal with the issue that caused the deviation into pensions, the rules at the time I applied, under John Major's premiership, absolutely included "i will not be able to attend in person at a polling station because of the nature of my job" in the list of reasons for which an applicant would be given such.
As a CANDIDATE in the wake of realisation that much maladminstration was afoot I was handed a document produced by the electoral commission as past of my candidate information pack which included a whole list of things the commission would prefer I, and any of those working for me in a paid or voluntary capacity avoided doing like the plague, but sadly the commission only made adherence to it volluntary, and in 2010 large numbers of both Labour and Tory candidates REFUSED to commit to the scheme. One had to wonder why. But then when both Labour AND Tory candidates started to be accused of illegal practices in this regard, perhaps the reasons were obvious ...

[Baff]

A secure online voting method would be good, but it has to be very secure and infallible.

It's not secure unless you are in the privacy of a voting booth.
Unless no one else can see what you vote.

[Sheepy]

No but any sensible and honest person is aware of the reality of it.

What your NI contributions buy is an entitlement to something future taxpayers will have to pay for. It does not pay for it. The government uses it to pay for current expenditure.

When you think about it, Politicians have told us some shockers over the years, in fairness to Barry, he believes them fairly often.

[srb7677]

Was it originally advertised as such?

No but any sensible and honest person is aware of the reality of it.

What your NI contributions buy is an entitlement to something future taxpayers will have to pay for. It does not pay for it. The government uses it to pay for current expenditure.

[srb7677]

Or are you own of the majority of people in this country that pays in less than you take out?

I know this question was not directed at me but since you refer to a majority of people I feel I wish to respond to it on my own behalf.

I myself am a nett contributor. I pay both Income Tax and National Insurance. I pay Council Tax. I pay Vehicle Excise Duty for my car and tax on the fuel that goes in it. I pay heavy duties on any alcohol I ever drink. And I pay VAT on most of the goods and services I buy. Yet I claim no welfare benefits at all. Nothing.

For a brief period of 3 months due to the previous lock down I was off work on full basic pay but that was only for a part time contract. During that limited period only I claimed some Universal Credit top up. But what I received, though a  gratefuly received lifeline at the time, is dwarfed by what I have paid and continue to pay in Income Tax alone this current tax year.

So I for one am one of those contributing to the pensions and benefits of others. I don't object but a little gratitude would be nice occasionally instead of trying to dream up ways of making voting or anything else even more hassle for people like me.

[Baff]

The real problem with postal votes is that is removes the freedom and anonymity of the voting booth.
In the booth, you can vote for who you like and nobody will ever be the wiser.
People filling out a postal ballot can be pressured, coerced, brow beaten and supervised by others.
It all falls far short of the basic test of fair and free.

Agree.
The polling booth is a safe space. Your home is not.

Secondary problem is some Imam in Tower Hamlets gathers them all up and used them to vote himself into office.
It's rife with potential for fraud.

[johnofgwent]

That is a legitimate concern.

But we all have the right to either request a postal vote or to vote in person. Anyone who fears coercion from others in their household still has the option not to choose a postal vote. Besides which, the sheer convenience of postal voting for many outweighs such concerns in my view and making voting easier inevitably translates into greater participation, thus enhancing democracy. There can certainly be no possible objection on such grounds to people who live on their own like me requesting a postal vote. There is after all no one else in my household to coerce me, and no one for me to coerce. My home is effectively as private as any ballot box because there is only me in it.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jun/02/uk.election20011
Admittedly from 2001, but it highlights the concerns.
As you say, you are alone in your household, and you are therefore free from coercion
My kids do as they bloody well pleased whether i liked it or not. They never had postal votes anyway.
I think the issue comes down to the degree of freedom we think members of households have. I have my own views regarding the former tory candidate's way of getting votes round here, but her dad's dead now so that's unlikely to be a problem in future