View Full Version : warning - politics - Local government and the Indy referendum
Nick Noble
16-Apr-12, 10:57
Rather than clutter this forum up with a huge post outlining my thoughts on the lack of importance that Independence has in regard to the imminent Highland Council elections you can read my lengthy blog post...
http://nicknoble.mycouncillor.org.uk/2012/04/16/local-government-elections-and-the-indy-ref/
feel free to comment, argue disagree either here or on the blog
Or indeed you can simply use twitter @NickNobleInfo
Can you give me a link to where the supporitn evidence is for this please Nick.
the SNP have stated that every vote for them in the local government elections is a vote for independence I have been googling and I cant find it. I can find Ruth davidson saying it and you saying it and the green party saying it but I cant find the SNP saying it.
Nick Noble
16-Apr-12, 12:40
It may be urban myth, and I will amend my blog post to reflect that now. I seem to remember seeing some footage on a news report where that was being said, but it is certainly not the major thrust of my argument.
Independence is an irrelevance in these vital local elections which decide how local services will be delivered for the next 5 years.
Thanks Nick for amending that although how you can have a fact that is alledgedly stated Im not sure :confused.
the fact that the SNP have allegedly stated that every vote for them in the local government elections is a vote for independence
You are however right - independence is an irrelevance in the local elections and despite what Ruth Davidson and others say, the SNP has NOT made it the thrust of their campaign. They have repeatedly said that the local elections will be fought and won on local issues. I have enjoyed your posts and tweets and I would hate to see you fall into the trap of this lazy snp bashing which detracts from the issues being discussed on doorsteps all over Scotland.
Whether it is about Independence or not is by the way. We all know that candidates will always try and pull the SNP down because they are afraid of them! I personally don't care about local issues and my vote will be going to the SNP purely because I think they are the only party for Scotland, Nationally and locally!! I will also be making the one vote and not go down this route of marking 1,2,3,4 in order of preference.
To me Nick you would have been better standing as an Independent rather than getting into bed with John and Marion Thurso, they have done nothing for us locally and are siding up with the Tories in Westminster, I am surprised that you would want to associate yourself with a party like that!!
And if I am being very honest, I hope the Liberals get a good thumping because they jolly well deserve it!!
C3.................[disgust]
Nick Noble
16-Apr-12, 13:19
I think it now is a far better blog:
"A few people I have met on the doorsteps have asked why I am not making more of an issue of independence and the referendum.
Quite simply because independence as an issue is an irrelevance and a distraction in these vital LOCAL elections."
Thank you pointing out how it read, that was not my intention. The issues are far too important for pettiness to predominate.
...I will also be making the one vote and not go down this route of marking 1,2,3,4 in order of preference...
Sorry but that is just stupid. You should number every option on the ballot paper based on your preference, even if you don't get your first choice it's a case of the lesser of two evils or in the very least being tactical. Also in some situations not numbering and using an X can't spoil the ballot.
Sorry but that is just stupid. You should number every option on the ballot paper based on your preference, even if you don't get your first choice it's a case of the lesser of two evils or in the very least being tactical. Also in some situations not numbering and using an X can't spoil the ballot.
Why should I vote for someone who I don't want elected?
C3...............:eek:
Nick Noble
16-Apr-12, 14:16
Why should I vote for someone who I don't want elected?
C3...............:eek:
Because whatever you do 3 people will be elected from the Thurso ward.
Clearly from what you say I am last on your list of candidates you would like to see elected, if you therefore rank all the candidates in order of preference with me 7th and everyone else does likewise my chances of getting elected diminish.
Only using once preference will not stop anyone getting elected. Using all your preferences might not, but it will make a difference.
Why should I vote for someone who I don't want elected?
C3...............:eek:
They're not 'voted' for unless your first choice gets in or doesn't get in depending on the type of election. You can't just all lump the others in one homogeneous group, even if you dislike them all you have to dislike some less or more than others. If you must only pick one then just use the number 1 instead of an X to mark that choice.
EDIT: As Nick said more than one person can be voted-in during a council election. In some types of election and systems the same party can run more than one person. In that situation surely you'd number the candidates from the same party if some sort of order.
Why should I vote for someone who I don't want elected?
C3...............:eek:
My very point against PR and the other watered down debacle. Which I seem to remember you supported.
Nick Noble
16-Apr-12, 14:23
As Nick as said more than more person can be voted-in in a council election.
More than one person WILL be elected in every Highland Council ward. The days of Thurso having three wards and three councillors are long gone.
It is a single ward with three councillors up for election out of 7 candidates.
Do yourself a favour and use your preferences to try and get the three you would dislike the least!
My very point against PR and the other watered down debacle. Which I seem to remember you supported.
So you'd never do something like:
1. I'd prefer Chinese food
2. Indian is quite nice
3. Sushi would be okay
3. I'd settle pizza
4. Anything but the chip shop.
I dont like PR either but its here and we have it so we need to work out how to use it. Its not really plain and simple so maybe Req you can explain how it works.
So you'd never do something like:
1. I'd prefer Chinese food
2. Indian is quite nice
3. Sushi would be okay
3. I'd settle pizza
4. Anything but the chip shop.
I might for a meal, although I'd like to see whoever gets to be a councillor encouraging a more diverse range of fast food outlets in the area, but politicians, I prefer one flavour only.
Nick Noble
16-Apr-12, 14:34
Single Transferable Voting system explained:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote
Also worth taking a look at Multiple Winner information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_systems#Multiple-winner_methods
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_systems#Multiple-winner_methods)
And in a nutshell to get elected any candidate in a 3 member ward needs to get 25% plus 1 vote of the votes cast made up of first preferences and then any redistributed second, third, fourth etc preferences from candidates who have already been eliminated. (In a 4 member ward such as Caithness Landward it is 20% plus 1 vote.)
I dont like PR either but its here and we have it so we need to work out how to use it. Its not really plain and simple so maybe Req you can explain how it works.
Bit of a thread hijack: Anyway there are different types of PR. The Scottish parliament actually uses a form of PR called the Additional Members System, most political parties use PR to pick their leader. The one we're talking about here is Single Transferable Vote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Transferable_Vote) in a multi-member constituency, also sometimes called Instant-Runoff Voting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting) in the US.
Do people actually need numbered preferences explained to them?
I might for a meal, although I'd like to see whoever gets to be a councillor encouraging a more diverse range of fast food outlets in the area, but politicians, I prefer one flavour only.
In your world I guess it's impossible for politicians to hold similar opinions on some issues or have any sort of overlap?
Nick Noble
16-Apr-12, 14:44
You could take a look at the full breakdown the last election results for the Highland Council, it gives a better picture of exactly the 2nd preferences etc are distributed.
Link to the breakdown of the 2007 results for Thurso:
http://www.highland.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/07A73EA0-0222-4351-BAF3-873B1378807F/0/Thurso.pdf
Bit of a thread hijack: Anyway there are different types of PR. The Scottish parliament actually uses a form of PR called the Additional Members System, most political parties use PR to pick their leader. The one we're talking about here is Single Transferable Vote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Transferable_Vote) in a multi-member constituency, also sometimes called Instant-Runoff Voting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting) in the US.
Do people actually need numbered preferences explained to them?
In your world I guess it's impossible for politicians to hold similar opinions on some issues or have any sort of overlap?
As I have said, if anyone thinks people vote for different parties because it is a local election then they are er... Special.
I always voted for "the man" rather than the party. We had a great councillor where i used to live and the fact that he did a good job was the most important thing. But in those days your councillor was SOMEONE. Here i voted before on the issues that affected me and my life so childcare and care for the elderly are my issues just now. I think the 1,2,3 thing detracts from that and encourages party loyalty rather than looking at the individual councillors.
I always voted for "the man" rather than the party. We had a great councillor where i used to live and the fact that he did a good job was the most important thing. But in those days your councillor was SOMEONE. Here i voted before on the issues that affected me and my life so childcare and care for the elderly are my issues just now. I think the 1,2,3 thing detracts from that and encourages party loyalty rather than looking at the individual councillors.
I tend to vote for the person also, I was just giving some examples. I'm mainly a fan of PR because it's more democratic, it ensures that the person elected has at least 51% of the vote in single-seat constituencies or whatever they set the quota at in any multi-member constituencies if they're used. I just don't think a party can claim it has a mandate if it just gets 30-40% of the vote.
It also allows a party to field more than one candidate without splitting the vote meaning people can vote for the representative of that party they most agree with or feel most engaged by without needing to take other things into consideration.
Nigel Shelton
16-Apr-12, 23:38
Why this Corrie 3 mlarky? Fraid of something? And you had the gall to accuse me of wasting my vote !!!!
I always voted for "the man" rather than the party. We had a great councillor where i used to live and the fact that he did a good job was the most important thing. But in those days your councillor was SOMEONE. Here i voted before on the issues that affected me and my life so childcare and care for the elderly are my issues just now. I think the 1,2,3 thing detracts from that and encourages party loyalty rather than looking at the individual councillors.
The only issue that concerns me is keeping council tax as low as possible as I get very little for it. I know who to vote for for that!
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.