Liberal Democrats retain control of Newbury Town Council Options

[CharlieF]

People who owe money....

Indeed or who are abused and afraid...

[user23]

I think the public are generally against it, from what they have told us.

Yes, but from what the public had told you, you thought Labour had a chance of taking control of the council.

[Andy Capp]

Yes, but from what the public had told you, you thought Labour had a chance of taking control of the council.

I have never heard any candidate talk-down their chances in an election.

[Criddleback]

I think there is a bigger issue even than that. There is a sizable number of people who have actively disenfranchised themselves and are not registered anywhere to vote. They are not illegal immigrants but they are hiding because they are afraid of being traced - by abusive partners, stalkers, debt collectors etc.

Agreed Charlie - and that is a tragedy because by just ticking one simple box on the registration form their name will be witheld from any publicly available electoral list (the edited list).

[user23]

I have never heard any candidate talk-down their chances in an election.

I've never heard them get it so amazingly wrong, not locally anyway.

It was a real "Kinnock in 92" moment.

[Andy Capp]

I've never heard them get it so amazingly wrong, not locally anyway.

It was a real "Kinnock in 92" moment.

You don't remember David Steele's 'prepare for governemnt' speech?

You mischievously 'encourage' people to stand for what they believe, only to seemingly 'enjoy' knocking them if unsuccessful.

[user23]

You don't remember David Steele's 'prepare for governemnt' speech?

You mischievously 'encourage' people to stand for what they believe, only to seemingly 'enjoy' knocking them if unsuccessful.

Perhaps if what someone believes is so outlandishly wild and off the mark they deserve to be "knocked"?

They certainly did this to Kinnock and Steele.

[Andy Capp]

Perhaps if what someone believes is so outlandishly wild and off the mark they deserve to be "knocked"?

Why? It seems to be something you enjoy doing and it is not very dignified of you.

[Cognosco]

I agree.It is unfair. We should have proportional voting systems. But I don't agree with compulsory voting which is the only way I can think that you could get the other 52% who didn't vote to vote. They all had voting cards sent to them. They had the option of having postal votes by filling out a form which takes 10 seconds to fill out. They had ample warning and were reminded many times through various media. Or are you saying that because 52% of people can't be arsed to fill out a form and post a ballot, or walk a few minutes to vote, then that invalidates the whole democratic process of this country? That's radical.

Most common reason I have been given is "I don't want any of them so not bothering voting". The other reason is "it is not the MP's who run the country but the financial sector and the banks but not one is willing to take them on to make changes".

Also a lot of people only vote for a candidate not because he thinks he/she is the right person to do the job but purely to stop the one person they don't want to get voted in. I think this is why the Lib Liars paid the price nationally this time? They were voted for to stop the Tory right getting in but then allowed them to take control by going into coalition with them.

Also as Richard Garvie states the general public are so disillusioned with politicians that they are treated with the same contempt as double glazing salesmen.

Don't have the answer to the problem but I do believe things will have to change and the sooner the better?

[Andy Capp]

On the other hand, maybe people are simply content with things and don't feel the need to vote; secure in the knowledge that the people that do, will vote for a reasonable person.

[Andy Capp]

They certainly did this to Kinnock and Steele.

Until something happens, no-one can be sure. While RG spoke of wish to take control of the council, I am sure deep down that he knew this wouldn't happen.

[Richard Garvie]

I agree with User23 to a certain extent. I personally said that on the returns, we were going to do really well. It became clear in the week of the election that we needed a big turn out to take some seats. When we looked at likelyhood to vote, those who were certain to vote were typically blue and wanted to vote no to AV. A lot of those who said they would vote for Labour had said they were either not fussed about the AV vote or they would probably vote against it. But the likelyhood to vote was much lower.

As I've said before, I've learned so much from my first election campaign, likelyhood to vote will certainly be something I look at in the run up to an election so that we focus on trying to get those people out to vote. Labour HQ wanted to increase the vote on 2007 and maybe if we could even beat the general election total, that would be a fantastic achievement based on the result from 2010 where we lost a deposit. We got almost 10% of the vote, up from a couple of percent in 2007. The party are obviously delighted. My own opinion though is that to stop the things that we have campaigned against, we needed to win the council and that hasn't happened. But from being a bit gutted about not winning seats, the fact we have smashed all internal predictions has been a massive shot in the arm and shows we are making big process. Remember: I only joined the party six months ago and Rome wasn't built in a day.

[Cognosco]

I agree with User23 to a certain extent. I personally said that on the returns, we were going to do really well. It became clear in the week of the election that we needed a big turn out to take some seats. When we looked at likelyhood to vote, those who were certain to vote were typically blue and wanted to vote no to AV. A lot of those who said they would vote for Labour had said they were either not fussed about the AV vote or they would probably vote against it. But the likelyhood to vote was much lower.

As I've said before, I've learned so much from my first election campaign, likelyhood to vote will certainly be something I look at in the run up to an election so that we focus on trying to get those people out to vote. Labour HQ wanted to increase the vote on 2007 and maybe if we could even beat the general election total, that would be a fantastic achievement based on the result from 2010 where we lost a deposit. We got almost 10% of the vote, up from a couple of percent in 2007. The party are obviously delighted. My own opinion though is that to stop the things that we have campaigned against, we needed to win the council and that hasn't happened. But from being a bit gutted about not winning seats, the fact we have smashed all internal predictions has been a massive shot in the arm and shows we are making big process. Remember: I only joined the party six months ago and Rome wasn't built in a day.

It needs a good opposition to keep a good council on its toes and not to let the council get complacent.
Do not just knock them for the sake of it but give encouragement when they do something worthwhile.
But make sure you give them H-E-L-L when they get it wrong and ensure everyone gets to hear about the abuses of power and dodgy dealings that has been going on over the last few years.

[Richard Garvie]

It needs a good opposition to keep a good council on its toes and not to let the council get complacent.
Do not just knock them for the sake of it but give encouragement when they do something worthwhile.
But make sure you give them H-E-L-L when they get it wrong and ensure everyone gets to hear about the abuses of power and dodgy dealings that has been going on over the last few years.

Spot on.

[dannyboy]

So they get into power with only approx of 1/3 of the electorate voting for them then? Fair?

Of course it is fair.

[Cognosco]

Of course it is fair.

Explanation for why?

[Richard Garvie]

Explanation for why?

It's fair because everyone is entitled to vote for each seat in their ward. If people choose not to vote, that is their right. In my opinion, the winner should be the person with the most votes cast. So by that token, the result is fair.

[Cognosco]

It's fair because everyone is entitled to vote for each seat in their ward. If people choose not to vote, that is their right. In my opinion, the winner should be the person with the most votes cast. So by that token, the result is fair.

But like in my case there were only two parties to vote for Con or Lib Liars and I wanted neither. Ergo did not vote.
Are you saying I should have voted for someone I did not want?

The only way is for there to be some way of selecting non of the above and if the majority of voters select this option then we will know for sure that things much change. Any suggestions as to how to overcome this very serious problem?

[CharlieF]

Agreed Charlie - and that is a tragedy because by just ticking one simple box on the registration form their name will be witheld from any publicly available electoral list (the edited list).

That wouldn't help. It is the full register that is available to credit reference agencies. And the credit agencies records are searchable by their customers, who could be anyone not just financial institutions.

By selecting to be on the edited register you are merely saying you don't want to be contacted for marketing purposes.

So basically the electoral roll can be used to trace anyone who is on it.

#
Myth: When I register to vote my details will be passed on to lots of marketing companies
Truth: There are two versions of the electoral register – the full version and the edited version. The full register is used only for elections, preventing and detecting crime and checking applications for financial credit. The edited register is available for general sale and can be used for commercial activities like marketing. When you register to vote, you can choose to tick a box to opt out of the edited register, which means your details will not be used in this way. http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/why_should_i_...ni_version.aspx

[Andy Capp]

It's fair because everyone is entitled to vote for each seat in their ward. If people choose not to vote, that is their right. In my opinion, the winner should be the person with the most votes cast. So by that token, the result is fair.

Which is contrary to Labour's manifesto, and all the other turn coats in your party.