ManxTaxPayer Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I really can't understand anyone who can't be bothered to vote, particularly on the pretext that we do not have a democracy. The number of people who may be disinterested or disheartened with Manx politics and think that they are being clever by excluding themselves from the process is worrying. It is little more than apathy and laziness and I wouldn't give it credence by calling it anything else! If you don't vote, how will anything ever change? Maybe most don't want change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Personally I think it's more a issue of quality of people to vote for.. In my area in previous elections I despair looking through the list of candidates as if it's not a lack of credibility it's a lack of education . Running this Island is a major task and I'm afraid the people in power for the most part are lacking in so many ways. A good strong honest leader would be a help !! MLC 's need to go too as for the most part there useless and for the most part contribute nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 As I said I would like to see evidence for that statement rather than discussing probabilities which we can all have an opinion on. At face value we have taken around 15,000 whole households of the electoral roll. You can't say that isn't going to affect voter turn out numbers without producing better evidence than you have. I do agree with you on the whole process has been stupidly handled and stupidly implemented. We're not really talking about the same thing. I agree that voter turnout numbers would be down (and that that is very bad), it's just that when politicians discuss turnout they usually refer to the percentage turnout[1] and poor registration practices can paradoxically increase that percentage. As to evidence, there's been quite a lot of work done on this recently by the Electoral Commission in the UK[2] and the sort of people who are less likely to be registered (young, in private rented accommodation, ethnic minorities, out of work or in no-security jobs) are also the sort of people who are less likely to vote even if they are registered. Similarly in the Island the Boundary Commission worked out the percentage of those who should be registered (based on the Census) who actually were. The figures are on the individual boundary maps which can each be linked to from my post on the Election Predictions thread). In settled, usually affluent, rural areas (Garff, Patrick) the percentages were high sometimes over 100%[3]. In contrast certain areas of Douglas were much lower. No Douglas constituency achieved much more than 85% registered and Strand (effectively the Prom up to Broadway) only had 61% of the people registered they should have had. There are similar characteristics here to the low-registration areas in the UK, especially a lot of private renting with high turnover. [1] One irritating part of this is that Manx election results often don't include the total valid electorate, just the percentage and you have to work backwards to get a rough figure (and trust they've done the calculation right). [2] Partly because it's their job, but also because of fears that the new system of individual registration (as opposed to household) there will cause a lot of people to drop off the electoral register. [3] I suspect this is because they made certain assumptions to work out the estimated numbers of potential voters which probably underestimated the figures (eg in such areas people might be less likely to have children under 16). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Also why has this letter come from the cabinet office, is this not the electoral register an independent body? It should be. But the Cabinet Office seems to be busy taking on more and more roles. I think electoral registration used to be part of Economic Affairs along with things such as the Census, and presumably it moved with that into the Cabinet Office. As usual it's difficult to find an organisation chart, not least because Bell likes to reorganise government as an alternative to actually governing. Electoral registration is one of those jobs that requires a lot of people in short bursts, but not that many doing it year-round. It's probably more efficient to do it alongside other activities, so you can bring in people from other areas as required. In the UK it's done by local authorities (except in Northern Ireland where there is a separate office) and usually comes under the CEO's Office, so the Cabinet Office would be nearest equivalent here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trmpton Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I'm not so sure that's a bad thing. Do we really want all data on ourselves to be centralised and accessible by all governmental departments? There's something to be said for just providing each dept with only the info they need and nothing else. There's no real need for them to share everything with each other. That's a stunning understanding of system and database design you have there. I can only assume that you are DBA for ISD (or whatever they are called now) Inagine if the was a way to store all data centrally, so that updates such as change of address, a death etc only had to be entered once and yet other data whilst centrally stored and shared where relevant could be made available only to those who needed it! It would be like living in the 1960s and would revolutionise the way private businesses store data and manage efficiency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I received another form to fill in Can only presume I failed my first application for being generally undesirable in Dellas's eyes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 As I said I would like to see evidence for that statement rather than discussing probabilities which we can all have an opinion on. At face value we have taken around 15,000 whole households of the electoral roll. You can't say that isn't going to affect voter turn out numbers without producing better evidence than you have. I do agree with you on the whole process has been stupidly handled and stupidly implemented. We're not really talking about the same thing. I agree that voter turnout numbers would be down (and that that is very bad), it's just that when politicians discuss turnout they usually refer to the percentage turnout[1] and poor registration practices can paradoxically increase that percentage.. No we're not and I think you're being obtuse as I made my view clear at the start. I can't help believing that this is an orchestrated move to ensure that less people (ie. the actual number of voters able to cast a vote) are able to vote in the general election; whilst at the same time trying to ensure that the official records which reflect the percentage of people who were entitled to vote and who subsequently did vote (ie. the percentage voter turnout) stays the same or increases. I do not believe that they are that incompetent that they thought that managing the process in this way would result in physically more people turning out to vote as that can't possibly be the case. I don't care about percentage turnout as that is a defective benchmark and it's more likely to go up in inverse proportion to the number of people who have been removed from the list. So I think this whole exercise is flawed and actually if you were a cynic you might say that it looks like government is deliberately culling the number of people who might well turn up and vote out some of those who intend on standing again by only leaving on the voter list a smaller number of people who are more likely to turn up and vote for some of them individually. When 156 votes can get you into Keys in some wards I think it's an absolute disgrace that 15.000 households can be kicked off the electoral roll in the run up to an election year. Citing migrant work forces isn't sufficient as we don't have anything like that kind of turnover in a decade never mind a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MrFunk Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Avoided voting for years because it was always the same shower of shit candidates. Got motivated and angry before the last election so registered, within 12 months I was signed up for dury duty despite never knowing anybody else who had ever been put forward including both parents who had been on the register if such a thing existed for 60+ years each. The trial was estimated to last 6 months, I pleaded to get out of it or at least be given a potentially shorter trial ...not possible. If my number would have been picked out of the hat then my business and income would have ended their and then. I had a couple of months of stress and worry over seeing it all go tits up at the whim of some government asshole. This letter can go in the bin with the other one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yin & Yang Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I'm just wondering how many times I have to fill out and send the form in, for them to actually put me back on the register! So I'll be hoping for 3rd time lucky with the latest one. I don't think that it is specifically a conspiracy to keep me off the register, but it does make me wonder just how many people have sent in their forms only to find out that they're not on the list! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 As I said I would like to see evidence for that statement rather than discussing probabilities which we can all have an opinion on. At face value we have taken around 15,000 whole households of the electoral roll. You can't say that isn't going to affect voter turn out numbers without producing better evidence than you have. I do agree with you on the whole process has been stupidly handled and stupidly implemented. We're not really talking about the same thing. I agree that voter turnout numbers would be down (and that that is very bad), it's just that when politicians discuss turnout they usually refer to the percentage turnout[1] and poor registration practices can paradoxically increase that percentage.. No we're not and I think you're being obtuse as I made my view clear at the start. I can't help believing that this is an orchestrated move to ensure that less people (ie. the actual number of voters able to cast a vote) are able to vote in the general election; whilst at the same time trying to ensure that the official records which reflect the percentage of people who were entitled to vote and who subsequently did vote (ie. the percentage voter turnout) stays the same or increases. I do not believe that they are that incompetent that they thought that managing the process in this way would result in physically more people turning out to vote as that can't possibly be the case. I don't care about percentage turnout as that is a defective benchmark and it's more likely to go up in inverse proportion to the number of people who have been removed from the list. So I think this whole exercise is flawed and actually if you were a cynic you might say that it looks like government is deliberately culling the number of people who might well turn up and vote out some of those who intend on standing again by only leaving on the voter list a smaller number of people who are more likely to turn up and vote for some of them individually. When 156 votes can get you into Keys in some wards I think it's an absolute disgrace that 15.000 households can be kicked off the electoral roll in the run up to an election year. Citing migrant work forces isn't sufficient as we don't have anything like that kind of turnover in a decade never mind a few years. All people had to do was fill in a very simple form and post it back free of charge. Thousands could not be arsed to do so and have been removed from the list. They have been given new forms to sign and return, but again can't be arsed FFS how simple is that. This thread is a joke, but worse still is that the ones moaning are the first to whinge when they don't like what MHK's do . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I really can't understand anyone who can't be bothered to vote, particularly on the pretext that we do not have a democracy. The number of people who may be disinterested or disheartened with Manx politics and think that they are being clever by excluding themselves from the process is worrying. It is little more than apathy and laziness and I wouldn't give it credence by calling it anything else! If you don't vote, how will anything ever change? You need to flesh out the first sentence you've wrote as you're not really making much of a point. Why do you think any change will come about from voting? What do you think would change if, hypothetically, everyone voted? My prediction would be a different bunch of people in government. We could say that they would have the public endorsement to make decisions, but that doesn't mean they will carry out the wishes of people and it doesn't mean that change that addresses popular desires would come about. Seems like you are too wrapped up in the myths of representative democracy. Nothing wrong with calling this apathy. The very system creates apathy because participation in it amounts to so little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ta laue y jouyl ayn Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Avoided voting for years because it was always the same shower of shit candidates. Got motivated and angry before the last election so registered, within 12 months I was signed up for dury duty despite never knowing anybody else who had ever been put forward including both parents who had been on the register if such a thing existed for 60+ years each. The trial was estimated to last 6 months, I pleaded to get out of it or at least be given a potentially shorter trial ...not possible. If my number would have been picked out of the hat then my business and income would have ended their and then. I had a couple of months of stress and worry over seeing it all go tits up at the whim of some government asshole. This letter can go in the bin with the other one. It's Jury service, any person who is self employed can applied to be excused and that happens frequently. If you run a business and your jury service could affect the running then again you could apply to be excused. Your parents would not have "been put forward" all persons on the jury register are selected at random for jury service, this is from an annual list produced and is used by the Coroner's who are responsible for summonsing the jurors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevster Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I'm one of the 15,000, won't be filling it in either as I don't agree with how the electoral roll data is publically shared. Just tick the box to not be included in the sold version Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxb&b Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Lol, seriously? What a lame and predictable post. Think you need to go back to trolling school for a refresher course. You were always a muppet but now you're a predictable boring muppet. Must try harder! Ah, your enthusiasm for banter only goes so far. Ok I've read this back and if you were just being 'bantery' then I apologize. It's just not like you and caught me on the hop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I'm just wondering how many times I have to fill out and send the form in, for them to actually put me back on the register! So I'll be hoping for 3rd time lucky with the latest one. I don't think that it is specifically a conspiracy to keep me off the register, but it does make me wonder just how many people have sent in their forms only to find out that they're not on the list! That's because you didn't vote for the "right" person last time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.