2015 Election season ..........stuff it in here.

[ealingfox]

Postal vote arrived on Friday, filled it in and sent it off yesterday. As I work in local government I am obliged to undertake elections duties, and as I can't drive I will be a poll clerk on the day of the election, ticking off names and such. Have to vote by post as I will start work at 6am and finish at 10:30pm. Grim. When accepting the job offer you literally have to sign all your rights away

[ramboacdc]

Postal vote arrived on Friday, filled it in and sent it off yesterday. As I work in local government I am obliged to undertake elections duties, and as I can't drive I will be a poll clerk on the day of the election, ticking off names and such. Have to vote by post as I will start work at 6am and finish at 10:30pm. Grim. When accepting the job offer you literally have to sign all your rights away

 

i have always wondered where they get them guys from! i now have many questions i wish to ask you!

is it your local poll station or is that not allowed?

can you not vote then on the day if that is your local poll station?

do you have to work that whole day? is it not shift work?! 

do you get paid? if not what do you get in return for it?

do you get given a list of can and can nots for people working in there and what voters can and cant do?  i know they can have a radio on as long as its not broadcasting any political messages. the polling station near me always seem to have the radio on heart FM or something!  

 

sorry! 

[ealingfox]

i have always wondered where they get them guys from! i now have many questions i wish to ask you!

is it your local poll station or is that not allowed?

can you not vote then on the day if that is your local poll station?

do you have to work that whole day? is it not shift work?! 

do you get paid? if not what do you get in return for it?

do you get given a list of can and can nots for people working in there and what voters can and cant do?  i know they can have a radio on as long as its not broadcasting any political messages. the polling station near me always seem to have the radio on heart FM or something!  

 

sorry! 

 

No worries  , Boroughs do usually advertise for the public to take up elections roles but they will try to fill up all the positions with Council/Borough employees first. Let's see now

 

- Irrelevant for me as I am voting in a constituency outside the Borough I work for. They give you a random polling station within the Borough you work for but you can express a preference for which area of the Borough they give you. Should it turn out to be your registered polling station that you are allocated, I believe you are allowed to vote in person at the discretion of the Presiding Officer for that station as there are 3 people working and it takes 2 to process a given elector.

 

- Yep, have to arrive at 6am to set up the station for the polls opening at 7am, and work all the way through to close of polls at 10pm, before making sure everything is correct and then clean up the station. It's all in one shift, the same 3 people are there consistently throughout the day, no shifts. I guess this is in the interests of security, integrity etc. You have to bring your own food as you can't leave and any breaks are at the Presiding Officer's discretion.   As I said, you do have to sign a form waiving all your human rights as an employee for that day 

 

- For going through that, thankfully you do get paid. Poll clerks get about £250 whilst Presiding Officers (essentially the manager of the polling station) get about £350. It doesn't count as a day off regular work or anything so this fee is also on top of my regular wage which is decent.

 

- Everyone goes through compulsory training and has a handbook etc on the work and the process. Most of the set-up will be whats required by law but I guess any little things like having the radio on will be at the discretion of the Presiding Officer after considering any implications.

[ADK]

£250 for sitting in a polling station is pretty decent.

[Webbo]

 

 

 

 

Labour supported - and, yes, benefited from - Scottish DEVOLUTION (and the Tories opposed it). Labour always opposed Scottish NATIONALISM (i.e. independence) and led the campaign against independence last year. The Tories have now switched from opposing any form of devolution to fanning the flames of full-blown nationalism in both Scotland and England, solely to procure short-term party advantage, but apparently quite happy to risk the break-up of the UK. That's a big difference.

 

As someone who doesn't want the UK to break up, I also think it's the wrong path - and an utterly immoral disgrace to do it purely for short-term advantage.

 

As several responses to this have already shown, though, a lot of people on the Tory right positively relish the break-up of our country, so long as it eliminates leftist elements and allows Thatcherism to prevail in the rump English (& Welsh/N.I.) state.

 

The Right already denies the SNP's democratic right to influence Westminster politics if they win the votes to do that (personally, I hope they don't). Like the Right in USA, they're not far short of denying the democratic right of elected leftist parties to govern.

 

I expect a constitutional crisis, fuelled by the Tories and right-wing media, if Labour form a minority government.

A post-election Tory Right / UKIP merger wouldn't surprise me in the slightest, either. 

Come off it alf, what can be more nationalistic than giving a country it's own parliament, sold on the premise that they wouldn't have to be ruled by "tories" in England. All these  constitutional problems were predicted back in the 70s if they've come back to bite Labour in the arse then serves them right.

 

As for immoral disgrace lets not pretend Labour don't indulge in scaremongering and lies too.

[ramboacdc]

£250 for sitting in a polling station is pretty decent.

i was thinking that. and ive read that as you have to be released from work like jury duty. so days wage and £250. 

sit there with my phone and a charger all day and im laughing!

[MooseBreath]

Of course the result matters. If it was a left-wing party who stood the chance amid the same circumstances you and your brethren would be squawking from the tip of Cowes to the fields of Gretna Green. Don't try to dress this up in altruism - it's way too obvious for that.

As it happens, though I want to see the Union stay as it is I'm very much in favour of more decentralisation and more power being given to local government, but at a much smaller level - not a national one.

If I lived in an overwhelmingly left wing country which kept having to put up with right wing government's due to the ability of their noisy neighbours to vote then I'd certainly support the idea that the left wing country should have the government they vote for. That's what democracy is. Either Britain is one country or not, we can't have citizens of an increasingly separate country continuing to vote. It's absurd and flys in the face of what democracy is supposed to be about. We should have a referendum on our place in Britain before we do about our place in the EU imo.

[Alf Bentley]

Come off it alf, what can be more nationalistic than giving a country it's own parliament, sold on the premise that they wouldn't have to be ruled by "tories" in England. All these  constitutional problems were predicted back in the 70s if they've come back to bite Labour in the arse then serves them right.

 

As for immoral disgrace lets not pretend Labour don't indulge in scaremongering and lies too.

 

Labour scaremonger and lie, too. All parties distort the truth to varying degrees during an election campaign, but the Tories are absolutely leading the field this time. Bribes + Unfunded spending commitments + Lies = Tory 2015 campaign.

 

What could be more nationalistic than giving a country its own parliament is giving it its own nation state. The SNP has always wanted that. Labour has always opposed that. The Tories used to oppose both Scottish independence and devolution, but now seem happy to encourage Scottish nationalism with its dreams of independence, purely for short-term party gain, as the Thatcherite Michael Forsyth correctly points out:  http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/20/tories-playing-dangerous-game-scotland-lord-forsyth

 

If I lived in an overwhelmingly left wing country which kept having to put up with right wing government's due to the ability of their noisy neighbours to vote then I'd certainly support the idea that the left wing country should have the government they vote for. That's what democracy is. Either Britain is one country or not, we can't have citizens of an increasingly separate country continuing to vote. It's absurd and flys in the face of what democracy is supposed to be about. We should have a referendum on our place in Britain before we do about our place in the EU imo.

 

There are genuine issues over Scottish MPs voting on issues that have been devolved to the Scottish Parliament (e.g. health, education - though education and law were always different in Scotland, anyway) and that will presumably apply to more policy areas once devolution is extended (as all parties have promised).

 

Scottish MPs at Westminster will certainly still have some democratic voting rights at Westminster as they've just voted in a referendum to remain part of the state (UK). Defence, foreign policy etc. will remain UK issues with no devolution - and other massive areas, like the budget and taxation are still UK issues now (but may get devolved in due course). Democracy doesn't necessarily mean 1 centralised authority. We live in a single state with different powers devolved to Scotland, Wales & N. Ireland - and to local authorities with devolved powers over cities, counties etc. Will Manchester or Yorkshire cease to be part of the UK if Osborne's plans to devolve power to those cities/regions go ahead?

 

If Scotland voted for independence, that would be different. But it hasn't. It has just voted to stay in the UK, however inconvenient that may be to the Tories - and is set to democratically elect dozens of SNP MPs to the UK parliament, however inconvenient that may be to Labour.

[Rincewind]

On the Tory   Facebook page they are all over the 'danger' of a Labour SNP coalition.

[Webbo]

Labour scaremonger and lie, too. All parties distort the truth to varying degrees during an election campaign, but the Tories are absolutely leading the field this time. Bribes + Unfunded spending commitments + Lies = Tory 2015 campaign.

 

I'd call it a score draw atm.

[Jon the Hat]

On the Tory   Facebook page they are all over the 'danger' of a Labour SNP coalition.

 

And rightly so.  Both Labour and the SNP are almost guaranteed to **** up the economy, borrow, tax and spend more of our money without delivering much for it.

[leicsmac]

And rightly so.  Both Labour and the SNP are almost guaranteed to **** up the economy, borrow, tax and spend more of our money without delivering much for it.

 

So you're saying the idea of an independent Scotland and virtual free rein in England as a result is playing no part in the Tories current campaign planning?

[Webbo]

So you're saying the idea of an independent Scotland and virtual free rein in England as a result is playing no part in the Tories current campaign planning?

No it's not, but I guarantee that it's part of the SNPs planning.

[leicsmac]

No it's not, but I guarantee that it's part of the SNPs planning.

 

Actually you're probably right. They just have to let the SNP run amok and they may well get exactly what they want without lifting a finger.

[ramboacdc]

if labour get in as well they have said there will be no EU referendum. If the lib dems and conservatives get in it there will be one and the SNP will go for independence again cuz they dont want to be dragged out of the EU. which is fair cop. 

[Webbo]

I'm sure there are some Tories in England (and possibly some Labour as well) who would like to be independent of Scotland. The fact that 45% of Scotland voted for independence suggest that quite a lot of Labour supporters in Scotland would like independence too, doesn't mean that either party are actively trying to achieve that.

[ramboacdc]

no one is trying to achieve it officially. if SNP do whitewash scotland however they will have just cause to say "well we govern our self, we want to be independent."

in the job i am in we have a sales rep based in scotland. He is voting SNP because they have shown that given the chance they can run the country and keep everyone happy and balance the books. The success of the SNP is also the reason for the closeness of the independence vote in my eyes.  with Sturgeon behind the wheel now she can push it over the edge now. unlike salmond who was unlikable from the start. 

[Guest Bilo]

It does make you wonder what the result would be now if Scotland were to go to the polls about independence. It's clear to see why Miliband is so very keen that there isn't the second referendum the SNP want, presiding over the break up of the Union would not look good on either his or Labour's CV.

 

It looks reasonably clear that the chances of a full blown coalition are dead in the water, and the prospect of even a confidence & supply arrangement seemingly more remote. Meanwhile, even Lord Tebbitt has claimed that the Conservatives' scaremongering over the if-not-dead-then-dying prospect of a Labour-SNP arrangement could do little except boost the chances of the Labour Party in Scotland. 

 

All of the sniping between the Labour and the SNP camp just make the prospect of a second election before the year is out all the more likely. Labour look in a good place to be the largest party, but will be way short of an overall majority. 

 

The question then has to be: What happens to the party leaders? 

 

Would Cameron survive an electoral defeat and possible relegation to opposition?

If so, who replaces him?

If, as looks increasingly likely according to the polls, Farage loses the vote in Thanet, will UKIP change leaders? 

[Vacamion]

He is voting SNP because they have shown that given the chance they can run the country and keep everyone happy and balance the books.

They utterly can't balance the books. They promise spending levels even Labour woukdn't dream of , and to "end austerity" with the hint that the oil money will pay for it.

When you point out that by their own figures oil isn't worth enough per barrel to pay for everything they've promised, they come back with "yeah, but the oil price fluctuates" or "Stop talking Scotland down".

If you point out that you can't have Scandinavian style public services with USA level taxes, so it is inevitable that their spending plans will lead to eye watering taxes, you are called a Nawbag and a Quisling.

"The 45" have such a quasi religious view on independence that they won't listen to economic arguments.

Your colleague, like half the population up here, has been listening to the brainwashed fantasists whose plans will ruin Scotland and destroy the Union.

[Alf Bentley]

It does make you wonder what the result would be now if Scotland were to go to the polls about independence. It's clear to see why Miliband is so very keen that there isn't the second referendum the SNP want, presiding over the break up of the Union would not look good on either his or Labour's CV.

 

It looks reasonably clear that the chances of a full blown coalition are dead in the water, and the prospect of even a confidence & supply arrangement seemingly more remote. Meanwhile, even Lord Tebbitt has claimed that the Conservatives' scaremongering over the if-not-dead-then-dying prospect of a Labour-SNP arrangement could do little except boost the chances of the Labour Party in Scotland. 

 

All of the sniping between the Labour and the SNP camp just make the prospect of a second election before the year is out all the more likely. Labour look in a good place to be the largest party, but will be way short of an overall majority. 

 

The question then has to be: What happens to the party leaders? 

 

Would Cameron survive an electoral defeat and possible relegation to opposition?

If so, who replaces him?

If, as looks increasingly likely according to the polls, Farage loses the vote in Thanet, will UKIP change leaders? 

 

I wouldn't rule out the prospect of the Lib Dems being part of the equation, maybe in a confidence & supply arrangement with either of the "big" parties. The Tories will have little alternative unless they do significantly better than the polls are suggesting - and it might be a much safer, more stable option than the SNP for Labour if they end up leading a minority government. Even pessimistic predictions suggest the Lib Dems will hold 20-30 seats, so if Con or Lab get 285-290 seats, they could be in business - maybe with extra support from a smaller party other than the SNP.

 

I had assumed that whichever of Cameron and Miliband ended up in opposition would get a bullet. Now, though, I wonder if Miliband has done enough during the campaign to earn a Pearson-style reprieve if Labour lose narrowly.

 

Cameron will surely go if the Tories end up in opposition? 2010 wasn't a great result for the Tories, given the state of the economy and Brown's unpopularity, so following that up with a defeat would be fatal for his career, surely? Cameron himself suggested Osborne, Boris & Theresa May as people who might succeed him. Would Osborne, likewise, be damaged by an election defeat? Boris would be the high-potential, high-risk option. The Tory membership and MPs are generally supposed to be more right-wing than a few years back, so that will be a factor if a new leader is required.

 

If Farage loses in Thanet, he's already that he'd stand down as leader....in which case, Douglas Carswell must be odds-on to succeed him (he's expected to win Clacton again). He'd be a very different sort of leader - a very impressive media performer who comes across as more moderate, so maybe more likely to extend UKIP support beyond their core base, but less likely to inspire the angry brigade, compared to Farage. Might there be some sort of Tory Right / UKIP realignment, though, if the Tories lose?

 

In other news (1): Nearly 0.5m people registered to vote yesterday (last day).   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32401218

 

In other news (2): Fresh from the scandal about his bizarre use of alter egos for commercial ventures, Grant Shapps is now being accused of tampering with various people's Wikipedia sites (mainly rival Tories): http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/21/grant-shapps-accused-of-editing-wikipedia-pages-of-tory-rivals?CMP=share_btn_tw 

However, I heard that it wasn't Shapps who did it....it was this bloke called Michael Green: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-grant-shapps-getrichquick-guide-or-it-that-michael-greens-8209978.html

[Rincewind]

Had a leaflet today for the Lord Mayor election. Undecided about that. 1st  and 2nd choice. possible 2/3 unfancied ones. Libdem Indie.

When it arrived I thought it was the election ballot paper. Took it out of the letter box then went loo before opening it. Considered putting it to good use.

[Guest Bilo]

I wouldn't rule out the prospect of the Lib Dems being part of the equation, maybe in a confidence & supply arrangement with either of the "big" parties. The Tories will have little alternative unless they do significantly better than the polls are suggesting - and it might be a much safer, more stable option than the SNP for Labour if they end up leading a minority government. Even pessimistic predictions suggest the Lib Dems will hold 20-30 seats, so if Con or Lab get 285-290 seats, they could be in business - maybe with extra support from a smaller party other than the SNP.

 

I had assumed that whichever of Cameron and Miliband ended up in opposition would get a bullet. Now, though, I wonder if Miliband has done enough during the campaign to earn a Pearson-style reprieve if Labour lose narrowly.

 

Cameron will surely go if the Tories end up in opposition? 2010 wasn't a great result for the Tories, given the state of the economy and Brown's unpopularity, so following that up with a defeat would be fatal for his career, surely? Cameron himself suggested Osborne, Boris & Theresa May as people who might succeed him. Would Osborne, likewise, be damaged by an election defeat? Boris would be the high-potential, high-risk option. The Tory membership and MPs are generally supposed to be more right-wing than a few years back, so that will be a factor if a new leader is required.

 

If Farage loses in Thanet, he's already that he'd stand down as leader....in which case, Douglas Carswell must be odds-on to succeed him (he's expected to win Clacton again). He'd be a very different sort of leader - a very impressive media performer who comes across as more moderate, so maybe more likely to extend UKIP support beyond their core base, but less likely to inspire the angry brigade, compared to Farage. Might there be some sort of Tory Right / UKIP realignment, though, if the Tories lose?

 

In other news (1): Nearly 0.5m people registered to vote yesterday (last day).   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32401218

 

In other news (2): Fresh from the scandal about his bizarre use of alter egos for commercial ventures, Grant Shapps is now being accused of tampering with various people's Wikipedia sites (mainly rival Tories): http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/21/grant-shapps-accused-of-editing-wikipedia-pages-of-tory-rivals?CMP=share_btn_tw 

However, I heard that it wasn't Shapps who did it....it was this bloke called Michael Green: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-grant-shapps-getrichquick-guide-or-it-that-michael-greens-8209978.html

 

Some interesting thoughts there. I'd honestly missed that Farage would stand down if he lost in Thanet, Carswell would certainly be an interesting leader but you do get the impression that it'd be a case of putting lipstick on a pig unless he was willing to make serious changes - their obsession with immigration and the EU is in danger of turning them into a bit of a caricature rather than a real alternative to the Conservatives.

 

My concern with the Lib Dems is that an electoral car crash, which seems very probable, means that they will haemorrhage seats. If they fall down to 20-30 seats, it's far from certain that either the Tories or Labour could pick up the 290-300 seats needed to run a straight coalition. In addition to that, the Lib Dem 'brand' is tainted to Labour owing to them being in coalition with the Tories for five years, and you have to wonder if the Lib Dems as a party could stomach yet more unpopularity for getting back into bed with Cameron if the Tories are the largest party. There is the real possibility that Clegg himself could be in danger if he isn't careful.

 

As for Cameron going if he's ousted on May 7th, none of those options sound especially appealing surely? Osborne's unpopularity surely rules him out, May hasn't exactly been a roaring success as Home Secretary and Johnson, perhaps unfairly given the man's undeniable intellect, doesn't seem to be taken seriously and might be argued to lack the gravitas needed as a potential future PM.

 

I'm not overly shocked about 500k people registering to vote at the last minute - the advertising was very prevalent over the last couple of days before the deadline. 

[Nalis]

My mate counted votes numerous times back in Northern Ireland but, like Northern Ireland politics as a whole, it was a joke from what he said as everyone vote counts as slow as possible to gain as much money as possible due to bekng pakd by hour as opposed to receiving some sort of flat/standardised fee.

This also explains why the results in NI are always last to come through whereas the rest of the UK are on the ball. Hopefully the system in the home country has changed since then...

[The God Emperor]

If Farage loses in Thanet, he's already that he'd stand down as leader....in which case, Douglas Carswell must be odds-on to succeed him (he's expected to win Clacton again). He'd be a very different sort of leader - a very impressive media performer who comes across as more moderate, so maybe more likely to extend UKIP support beyond their core base, but less likely to inspire the angry brigade, compared to Farage. Might there be some sort of Tory Right / UKIP realignment, though, if the Tories lose?

 

Carswell is hardly moderate. His views on the NHS (or as he has refered to it, The National sickness service) alone put him further outside the mainstream than Farage. Plus there's also his views on fire arm controls and gay marriage.

Despite his conservative streak I do quite like him though.

[Harry - LCFC]

In other news (1): Nearly 0.5m people registered to vote yesterday (last day).   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32401218

 

Feels like there's been quite an effort to get people to register this year, especially amongst young people.