UKC

I've just enrolled with Manchester Metropolitan University. On the last page there is a blurb about how it is now illegal not to register to vote in the UK and failure to do so will result in an £80 fine.

I thought one of the corner stones of our democracy was that you didn't have to engage with the electoral process if you didn't want to. Did something change or is this just a rather sad attempt to force people to engage by a body that should know better?

In reply to ByEek:

You have to be on the electoral roll but you don't have to actually vote.

In reply to ByEek:

They are correct, you must register to be on the electoral roll (but you don't have to vote if you don't want to). You can actually register in two places (eg if you are a student), but can only vote once.
https://www.gov.uk/electoral-register/overview

In reply to ByEek:

People should be forced to engage. If more people cared, paid attention and weren't so apathetic, maybe the country wouldn't be in the shambolic state we currently find it in.

In reply to ByEek:

Did you then and do you now want to vote, irrespective of your latest discovery?

In reply to ByEek:
Over here, you're not forced to vote, but you are fined if you do not turn up at the Polling station to have your name crossed off the list, it's a small nominal fine. The penalty for first time offenders is $20, and this increases to $50 if you have previously paid a penalty or been convicted of this offence.

Some people, not,me I hasten to add, having been forced to attend, either do not make a mark on the ballot sheet, or draw a big cock on it, or write something abusive of politicians on it. Which is only fair.

Our voting sheets are a lot more complex here too, I had to order my choices from 1 Highest rated, (Australian sex party, ) to 22 lowest rated, (christian/bigot party.)

In reply to Big Ger:


That's far too complicated for most voters though, apparently. Or so the story went, fuelled by a government that was doing fine out of the existing, much less fair, way of doing things.

In reply to ByEek:

up here in Lanarkshire if you don't fill in the registration form you could be fined up to £1000. Their process is crap though as I filled out a form a couple of months ago and got a repeat this week. have since done it online.

In reply to Bimble:


'Don't vote - it only encourages them'

In reply to Fraser:


I have always registered and voted. But I never knew it was compulsory to register. That said, I reckon it is one of those laws that doesn't see much prosecution. It just feels a bit Big Brotherish.

In reply to ByEek:

It has always been compulsory to register, though the law has never been enforced and is indeed to all purposes un-enforcable, as would be compulsory voting. Rather the relevant authorities have desperately, in fact pleadingly tried to persuade people to register.

Recently voter registration was changed from "head of the household" to individual registration, in an attempt, almost certainly inadequate, to reduce voting fraud and "community voting". In practice to increase the integrity of ballots, postal votes need to be drastically curtailed to those that genuinely need them, i.e. the sick, the disabled and those really away on business and should mostly be one-time only with renewal for each ballot. Postal votes as at present are a ballot-rigger's paradise, on-line voting would be even worse - the secrecy of the ballot box completely disappears. If people cannot be bothered to wander to a voting station, their votes are not worth much.

There might however be a good argument for allowing REGISTERED voters to vote at any voting station and for electronic counting, though both of those have their own significant problems.

In reply to Bimble:


The trouble is that you could force people to vote but you can't force them to care or pay attention.

In reply to ByEek:

I seem to remember there were big issues with voter registration around the time of the "poll tax". Many people didn't register to vote in order to avoid registering for community charge. There's a school of thought that this is one of the reasons for the surprise labour loss in '92

In reply to john arran:


Only for general elections. Somehow we can handle more complicated ideas for local and other election types but our little brains melt down at the idea for a GE.

In reply to Big Ger:



For compulsory voting I think a none of the above box would be useful to make it clear that its saying bollocks to the lot of them as opposed to being unable to fill in a form. Although not sure what to do with the results. Whether to have a minimum votes for or it doesnt count or just have it clearly listed on all results.

In reply to ByEek:

Probably because they can sell the electoral roll to marketing companies for more money if they can claim everyone is on it and it is updated every year.

In reply to Bimble:


Wow 9 dislikes and counting!!

I can see the point of compulsory voting and like the idea, at least you get people to the polling station, they can then do what they like. I'd like to see an option of "none of the above" as a way of protest voting, rather than the way we have now of not voting or spoiling the paper.

I'm not convinced on making people vote, but I also don't see a way to get people more involved. JC seems to have done this, and he's being blamed for all the pestilence in the world.

In reply to ByEek:

Told the guy to f*ck off thank you very much. Registered elsewhere thanks. Apparently illegal according to the council employed student electoral monkey. I'm still waiting for the SWAT team.

D

In reply to Luke90:

You almost certainly can't, notionally forcing them to register does not work. What do you do if millions of people just don't vote even if they are registered, fine them all? Then what do you do if they don't pay the fines? Clog up the already overworked courts for a trivial offence? Give people criminal records for nothing tangible?


Certainly true, people not voting is self-selection to say they are not interested. Not sure why some think it would be wonderful if turnout went up hugely. In any case, there is no good reason to think that if the non-voters DID all suddenly vote in a fit of unexplained enthusiasm, they would vote much different to those who currently vote. The idea that there is some unharvested mass of votes for hard-left (or hard-right, or any particular view) policies is based on nothing more than wishful thinking.

Actually, the turnout for the last 3 or 4 elections has been climbing, while the turnout for the EU referendum was unprecedented for decades.

In reply to Simon4:

I didn't say I thought it was easy or a good idea

In reply to krikoman:

So what IS the point of forcing people to vote who are not remotely interested in doing so, do tell? Isn't it rather better, given that registering to vote and indeed voting is probably already far too easy, to allow them to remove themselves from the process and leave it to those who have some interest in it and have made some effort about the matter, no matter how slight?


You can? Suppose they still don't come, in their thousands or millions, even though you tell them they must. What do you do then?

Rule by decree really doesn't work, especially if you have no iron hand to force people to obey your decrees.

In reply to KevinD:

I find a big cock just as meaningful.