Category: Elections

Blog Nation: what would I like to see discussed

Posted on by David Landon Cole

Sunny ‘Liberal Conspiracy’ Hundal is organising a follow-up to 2008’s successful ‘Blog Nation’ event. Details over at Liberal Conspiracy, but Sunny asks what we’d like to discuss; below the fold, then, are some thoughts.

In terms of logistics, I would make three suggestions. Given the layout, it’s important that each table isn’t talking amongst itself thereby making so much noise that you can’t hear the speaker. Secondly, there are two breakout rooms. I would like to see the two used for an hour each for anyone to stand up a present an idea for five minutes. Thirdly, I’d like to see it recorded and ideally live streamed. Certainly, the plenary sessions could be on uStream or BlogTV.

Continue reading “Blog Nation: what would I like to see discussed” →

Re-Open Nominations

Posted on by David Landon Cole

In and amongst all the debates about reforming the electoral system, I’d like to flag up one that I particularly like. It’s simple, cheap and effective – Re-Open Nominations (RON).

The idea is very simple. On every ballot paper, at the bottom, is a candidate called RON. If RON wins, nominations are re-opened and the election is held again. Simple.

“A-ha”, I hear you cry, “but what about local councils?”

Local council wards each elect three councillors. If RON comes in the top three, anyone who would have been elected but comes below RON isn’t elected; anyone who beats RON is elected.

So, if the ward was Hogwarts and three were to be elected, only Alastor Moody would be elected and there would be a new election for the remaining two places:

Alastor Moody (elected)
RON (‘elected’)
Sirius Black (not elected)
Arabella Figg (not elected)
Albus Dumbledore (not elected)

Similarly, mutatis mutandis for Euro elections and the GLA.

Now, the advantages. People can express discontent with all the available options and, in instances where there’s only one candidate, means that they’re not elected by default. It’s slightly different to ‘none of the above’ in that it’s more constructive; someone isn’t necessarily elected just because no-one less crap ran.

xD.

PPERA imprints and Twitter

Posted on by David Landon Cole

Political wonks will be familiar, at the bottom of every piece of election literature (including stickers and t-shirts), with an imprint along the lines of

Printed and promoted by Anne Agent on behalf of Can D’Date, both of 29 Acacia Avenue, Dandytown.

I believe that’s a requirement under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act 2000 (PPERA). I know various candidates who, during election time, carry a similar imprint on their blog. I have two questions; is there a similar requirement for tweets and, if so, what would it look like

Mark Park of Lib Dem Voice has a partial answer.

PPERA 143 (6) says

The Secretary of State may, after consulting the Commission, by regulations make provision for and in connection with the imposition of requirements as to the inclusion in material falling within subsection (1)(b) of the following details, namely—

(a) the name and address of the promoter of the material; and

(b) the name and address of any person on behalf of whom the material is being published (and who is not the promoter).

A simple solution would be to allow political parties to set up a website (with a short url!). It could then, in a similar way to sites like bit.ly. You could have li.uk/aaa for an imprint from a Labour candidate, who happened to be assigned ‘aaa’. Whaddya think, Mark?

xD.