Good news. Or bad, depending on how you look at it. The good: voter turnout at Irish general elections has increased in every general election since 2002. The bad: the figures were: 2002 – 62%, 2007 – 67%, and 2011 – 70%. What’s bad about that? It means that, at its best, near to one-third of the Irish electorate don’t bother to turn up on polling day. British figures are even worse: 61% turned out in 2005, 65% in 2010. Margaret Thatcher came to power when 76% of registered voters came out to vote. A high figure, viewed one way; a figure where a quarter of the electorate couldn’t be bothered standing up and strolling down to the voting booth to block a hypocritical bully, viewed another way.
The most common reason given for opposing mandatory voting in elections is that a lot of people would spoil their ballots. I think this is to give the non-voter too much credit. By and large my guess – and it’s only that, a guess – is that most people who don’t vote act that way not because they are opposed to all political parties on offer, but because they can’t be bothered getting off their backsides and down to the local voting centre. If they faced penalties for not being there, chances are they’d find someone to vote for, even it was in their view the least bad on offer.
Why does voting matter? The most obvious answer is because it leaves the field free for others to make decisions about how your life is governed. That’s infantile behaviour. It’s also unfair (although at present legal): if at work you’re not part of a union, you still benefit from whatever the union succeeds in screwing out of management. So you get a free ride. Again, my view would be that since unions negotiate wages and conditions, everyone should be in a union and everyone should vote on proposals.
It’s not as if a monstrous imposition would be foisted on people. We have laws about how we drive our cars, how we move from one country to another, how we treat each other. We accept them, sometimes a little grumpily, because we see that they’re for the common good. Voting in elections, particularly general elections, is what decides the kind of society you’re going to live in. You may not think that worth the effort of a short stroll and an X on your ballot paper, but society clearly thinks it is, which is why we have it. Sometimes, given weak human nature, we have to be led by the hand to do the right thing, but at least we’re doing the right thing in the end. If we continue to leave things as they are, lazy toe-rags with the social conscience of a sewer rat are by their inaction leaving us with warped election results. Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Peru are among many countries where voting is mandatory. What kind of goms are we that we allow fat-bottomed clowns to sit at home and leave the choice of government to others? Wakey-wakey, guys.
Nail on the head as usual Jude, wel done’……..l
Grma, Gearoid
You would compel Irish citizens to partake in British elections,then,jude?
Yep. I’d prefer for them to partake in Irish elections, but since we’re stuck with British elections, yes.Definitely.
Even more reason for Irish people to vote if its a British election.
fiosrach
Would you refuse to take part in a border referendum as it would be under the auspices of a British government?
Jude, I’d be worried about the fascist element of being compelled to vote for a representative in whom you may have little confidence. Although I always vote, I also believe in the value of abstentionism in any society. It’s a bit similar to pacifism, which I believe should be a legitimate option during war time, even though a lot of people view it as repugnant.
Good point, Freddy. I’d accept that people could opt for the ‘None of the above’ box – or even spoiling their ballot. I don’t think that many (more) people would do that – I think it’s just the law of inertia in action. Once in the ballot box, I think they’d be as capable of a decent choice as anyone else. And I don’t think fascism comes into it – we have to do all sorts of things that are for the good of society. Like pay taxes…
I vote more and more reluctantly for provisional Sinn Féin but if they ever swear an oath to the Queen of England – like the post nationalist stoops/Hibs – then no power would make me vote again.
You’re a man of high principles, fiosrach. I’d be much more pragmatic: if it helped towards my central goal, I’d use it.
The sole Principle of every republican should be to achieve a United Ireland and Irish freedom. Do I want Sinn Fein to sit at Westminister? No. Do I think it would make Sinn Fein have more influence if they did sit in Westminister? Yes.
The SNP/Plaid Cymru take their seats in Westminister and I doubt very much they are sincere and genuine when they make an Oath to the Crown. Was Michael Collins genuine and sincere when he made it at the Anglo Irish Treaty? I doubt it very much. It was just another stepping stone to Collins and the Oath just consisted of empty words even the Crown would’ve suspected as much.
Saying that I don’t think Sinn Fein should take their seats now at Westminister. It would be far more damaging to them in terms of voters. Would I still vote for them? Yes but I don’t think most republicans share my outlook on things, so that’s why its a bad idea and its really not essential anyway. If only SF and SDLP did a sort of deal where SDLP got the most MP’s or all of the nationalist ones (and used their influence at Westminister) while Sinn Fein got the vast majority of nationalist MLA’s. Sounds a bit far fetched but its thinking outside of the box.
The right to vote is the greatest symbol of democracy. To vote or not to vote ? Perhaps people’s apathy about voting is a direct reflection of the dullness of our political representatives. If you want people to come into your shop and buy your goods, then you need to do a really good job of selling your product. I myself feel it is undemocratic to force people to use their vote. As a republican I think that, if Sinn Fein are prepared to take part in the farce that passes for politics here: then maybe they should take up their seats in Westminster. Least from there they can bring the argument for our desire for a reunited Ireland directly to the people of England.
I wouldn’t particularly care if SF appeared at Westminster, oath or no oath. But I don’t think it’s the job of politicians to persuade people they should vote, it’s the job of the individual to vote because s/he’s a member of society. That said/done, I’d be all for parties making their policies as appealing as possible.
Your very diplomatic Jude.
I have a gentle nature, moser…
The end justifies the means?
That implies that the means are morally bad/suspect, fiosrach. I would consider an oath of loyalty to QE2 about as important as cutting my toenails.
A man’s word is his bond, I give you my word,you have my word etc. Take an oath to yer woman and you give your word. Crossing fingers and laughing does not naysay it.
Well, that’s one way of looking at it. If a thief demanded that I make an oath to be loyal to him, and if it might lead to the repossession of what is rightly mine, I’d take the oath.
What if in a hung parliament there arose the possibility of extracting the promise of a border referendum and Sinn Féin held the balance… would the oath be worth it then? Just askin’ like.
I think fiosrach makes a very valid point about us being forced to partake in British elections, I have always voted and I enjoy the craic but some people might object to yet another piece of British legislation in our country. The general point you make is spot on Jude but to be honest if some people are too politically thick to vote then maybe they are better off staying at home.
Point taken, AJ. There is an element of stupidity in not voting – but more one of laziness, irresponsibility. Faced with a choice I think they’d probably be as shrewd – or dumb – as the rest of us.
Hire and fire rules OK
“Poverty is not caused by men and women getting married; it’s not caused by machinery; it’s not caused by “over-production”; it’s not caused by drink or laziness; and it’s not caused by “over-population”. It’s caused by Private Monopoly…The only reason they have not monopolized the daylight and the air is that it is not possible to do it.”
Robert Tressell’s comments in ‘The Ragged Trousered Philanthropist’ have contemporary relevance in the context of voting trends and union membership. The Tories have welcomed a pre-election endorsement by 100 business leaders as the Labour Party promised new rights for workers on zero-hours contracts. It is a case of zero-hours contracts for workers while some captains of industry earn in excess of £10 million per annum. We also learn today that a Chief Executive of a mental health charity receives a salary of £142,000 per annum.
The representatives of Labour in Scotland are being challenged by Scottish Nationalists and in Ireland the policies of the Labour Party continue to erode standards of living. There are choices to be made, to vote or not to vote, to join a union and develop policies that will improve working terms and conditions or do nothing, a response that will enable some individuals to enjoy wealth from unearned income and bonuses.
Jude, I feel that part of the problem is the fact that voting is on a Thursday and not at weekends. My own offspring were disenfranchised while working or studying away from home. A two-day voting period at the weekend, as is the practice in some European countries would be preferable. Could it be that the establishment parties don’t really want too many bolshie students to exercise their franchise?
You betcha, Colm. Totally in agreement. Run two-day weekend voting for two years, see if it gets the lazy + the v busy out. If not, make voting mandatory.
Should you wish to find a judge to administer summary justice in a wintery voice to those goms who opt not to vote, Esteemed Blogmeister, look no further than Madame Guillotine.
She is the formidable female who presides over ‘The Week in Politics’ on RTE, with gavel in one hand and a slim cheque in the other, slim, that is, by the standard Bill Gatesian system of measurement.When applied to monumental-sized emoluments.
Her gavel is a small ceremonial mallet of hardwood made and is regularly struck by her against a sturdy block which enhances its sounding qualities. It is a symbol of authority, the authority.of Madame Guillotine (a daarling title, Joxer, a daarling title).
– I don’t like people using the word ‘lying’ in MY studio !
The M-word was applied to the publicly owned studio in a strikingly personal and possessive way by Yawna Lawna (for it is she !) when her ‘guest’ Brian Stanley,TD of SF. used the l-word in relation to one of the PM Enda K’s minions. To say Madame Guillotine looked daggers at her ‘guest’ like a lawyer looking at a liar in court may not do Madame Guillotine full justice, but the knives were definitely out for Deputy Stanley. Indubitably so.
How the horse-hair wig and the ermine would become Supreme Court Justice.Yawna Lawna ! It is within the gift of, none other than the Yawnaiste to effect this style make over. Let;s hope she catches the hint; nothing being quite as catching as a Yawn. And the Yawnaiste, by all appearances, (certainly if one is to, erm,judge by the frequency of her on-camera appearances) lives quite contagious to RTE.
Also appearing in this programme,incidentally was Brer Rabbit, looking more and more like a superannuated Sumo Wrestler.
Should Madame Guillotine be unavailable due to a full judicial diary, no problem; look no further than the next door studio in RTE at Mademoiselle Guillotine’s availability. The following night she was.dealing in her unimpeachable and impartial manner at the OFFICIAL shindig planned for Easter 2016.
The theme music for ‘Claire Byrne Drop Dead and Alive Show'(for,yes, it is she !) is instantly recogisable: ‘ Who put the BA into BAlance? We did, we did’.
When this programme made its maiden voyage last month -the topic was Same Difference Marriage – she featured a tete a tete in the lead in, a hardhitting yet soft focus interview with the drop dead (see above) hunky Colin Farrell. He was there to talk about his bro, whose name, by all accounts is Gay Farrell.
While one could not quite see the relevance to the upcoming Referendum one was quite satisfied it was all conducted in a neutral and non-partisan manner.
The same was true on Tuesday night when the lead in was left in the capable hands of none-other than the neutral and non-partisan Bullock-befriending Bruton. Dressed, it must be recorded, in a most fetching Philip Marlowe-style white raincoat. (Complete with buttons -not bullets !- flying in all directions).
Wonderful wardrobe departments in these same-sex shows !
With documentary footage of Sackville Street in ruins flickering in the background the Philip Marlowe sartorial theme became instantly apparent, (except to those slow-learning gnationalists who are always with us, alas):though he may walk down mean streets, Bullock-befriending Bruton is in no way, mean himself.
-We should not celebrate death.
He intoned in a subdued bellow.
-There can be no hierarchy of victims.
As they were once colleagues in Government it is perhaps no surprise that he bore more than a passing resemblance to Brer Rabbit; in that he too looked every yard, a superannuated Sumo Wrestler.
All Sumo wrestlers take a professional name -called a shikona – and may or may not be related to their real names. (Perkie is happy to let his last remaining reader make his/her mind up on that one where it relates to Brer Rabbit and the Bullock-befriender).
They may be seen each noon,dressed only in loin clothes, outside the Dail Restaurant smacking their thighs and stamping their bare feet. Sumo wrestlers need to work up an appetite first.
On entry,they are confronted by a long, low table on which may be seen soup bowls and chopsticks ringed around an electric wok.(Think: Wokers Party).
In the wok can be discerned sliced tofu, carrots (a special fav of BR), cabbages,leeks, potatoes, lotus roots, daikon radishes, (gulp) shiitake mushrooms (a special fav of both), all boiling in a chicken broth.
This is chanko, the calorific staple diet of the superannuated sumo wrassler. The Japanese consider chanko a nutritious food that helps to make not only the bones – and this is the Thai kicker – the brains denser.
Thus do Brer Rabbit and the Bullock-befriending Bruton(when operating as a tag team of chankos they are known as Meat Bomb) sculpt their Moon Pie-shaped bodies by consuming prodigious portions of the above. Along with occasional side dishes of rice, omelettes, shrimp dumplings and fried chicken. And swilling copious quaniites of saki and rice beer.
The duo then take a long nap.
Their alarm clocks are duly set for the obligatory call from either Madame or Mademoiselle Guillotine.
It is done in preparation for their Big Day in the Rising Sun of the Superannuated Sumos: the centenary of the Battle of the Somme Enchanted Evening. When the Trench Foot will finally be seen to get the Upper Hand of the Trench Coat (duly left sleeveless by the sleeveens).Tiocfaidh a Law.
One has gone into some detail in this matter, Esteemed Blogmeister, on account of the reference in today’s blog to ‘the fat-bottomed clowns’ who choose to stay at home.
Should they be obliged to make their way to the nearest polling booth and duly winched therein, who, oops, whom (an old bugbear of one’s English lecturer) does one suppose they might be tempted to V-O-T-E for?
A weighty matter, worth pondering perhaps.
–
“The duo then take a long nap” gets today’s bullock-befriending rosette. Simple, monosyllabic and deadly. I doff my greasy cap, Perkie…
GRMA, EB.
Ought to have referred to the Bullock-befriending Bruton’s entering into the Studio Phase of the even-handed and open-minded show.
While he had indeed peeled off his dazzling white Philip Marlowe -style raincoat and changed into a de rigeur chanko-chomping banker’s three-piece pin-striped suit he had not totally shed his former PM-style, witty, one liner Tiocfaidh ar streets of L.A. mode of thought.
And just as the dispassionate Mademoiselle Guillotine had allowed him the first word so did she preserve the BA in BAlance by conceding to him the last word.
Which came wrapped in a non-irksome smirk, to do with the links the 1916 Terrs had forged with the (here he did his trade mark shoulder shake) with the Ho-ho-ho Hohenzollerns.
The kinda smirk that hit the whole of Hibernia in the hip pocket.
Get out of your flat-bottomed boats and V.O.T.E. !
Internet’s back up ….Jude!! Yes …put my name on the pot for compulsory voting.Then we’ll all have nobody else to blame but our own good selves for the people we ask to look after our lives.
“If voting changed anything they would have banned it.” Mark Twain.
“Voting only encourages them.” Russell Brand.
So its entirely possible that because voting changes little or nothing that we will be forced to indulge the chattering classes by being made to vote for their nonsense.
One quid pro quo in this new dispensation should be that all election promises must be made part of a legally binding contract between the electorate & the hopeful representatives which if they fail to fulfill they will be automatically de-selected.
However I doubt if that will happen. So we will be left being forced to elect a bunch of professional con men and women, who once elected will do as they always have done – ignore the empty pledges they made to an eternally gullible electorate.
Good thinking, Cushy Glen – at least in the first bit, re legally binding contract. Why not fine or imprison people for forming a legal contract and then reneging on it? Seems fair to me. And the thought of all those Lib Dems and Irish Labour party types in prison warms my heart…
Cushy Glen
I am entirely sympathetic to your view that voting may not change anything, but what then is your alternative?
I don’t know if I support compulsory voting or not. If I was forced to choose now I’d be more inclined to support it because it would have the full electorate out voting and it might even get people interested in politics, something they might have regarded as “boring” before without ever giving it a chance.
I’ve voted ever since the 2010 General Election. I come from a family where the majority of my relatives have absolutely no interest in politics and don’t vote but since 2010 I’ve convinced my mother to vote and I drive us both to the voting centre.
If compulsory voting was introduced, how would it work? would you be fined for not voting? would the police come knocking if you choose an episode of Eastenders over voting for your next MP? I’ll have to look up how the system works in Australia.
But isn’t it ironic? People in the past (and in some countries, the present) fought and died for our right to vote and for democracy but yet when we have it today most of the public cant be bothered to actually vote? Its getting that bad that the law is considering making it illegal NOT to vote? What a strange world we live in…..
What about this for an idea:
Only people who work and contribute tax to society should be able to vote.
If you are long term unemployed or on benefits why should you have a vote you don’t contribute to the cost of running the state and you get money for doing nothing now that’s hardly fair is it?
Almost as good as forcing people to vote…….
Ah neill – always good for a laff. I like your colourful scenario where we penalise all those slackers. But I’m still trying to figure out what it has to do with a decision to make voting mandatory.
That’s right wing nonsense Neill. Suppose all those hundreds of thousands of people who lost their jobs in Britain from the period 2008 to 2013 were lazy, benefit scroungers? Do you even know how much people receive on Job seekers allowance Neill? Its around £100 a fortnight, A FORTNIGHT, not an hour, not a day, A FORTNIGHT. Could you live on that? I doubt it very much. So trust me, no one likes being on benefits, and no Neill, I’m not on benefits.
So not content with people living in poverty you want to take away their right to vote in or out a government? You aren’t commentator David Vance by any chance Neill? Under another name? Or a relative of his? Your logic is very akin to his. Let Billionaire companies pay little or no tax (like Amazon) and let the poorest of the poor carry the heavy burden of bank/government debt. Its Victorian era economics that give rise to some of worlds most extremist ideologies, such as Communism, Stalinism, etc. and reduced millions to the worst living conditions imaginable.
Think about you Speak/comment, man.
long term unemployed did you miss that part of my comment?
If benefits are so bad how come so many fit and healthy people chose to be on benefits?
How many jobs have amazon created in the UK and Ireland?
If you want t o be a bleeding heart liberal that’s your privilege and right however in the real world of business your opinion would be considered an infantile one
I was arguing against making voting mandatory why should people who contribute nothing have a say in how the land is ran?
So are you saying everyone on the dole is there because they choose to be??
Many choose that as a lifestyle choice you know that as I do
Ok Neill, you made the claim, now please stand over it. How many choose benefits as a lifestyle choice? Can you give the number? A percentage? Or did you make that up based on certain TV ‘documentaries’, showing worse case scenarios?
Facts, Neill, not perceptions.
Even those on benefits contribute to society. Or do they not pay VAT, for example, on what they buy? Some even volunteer in places like charity shops. Is this not a contribution to society?
A neighbour of mine recently got back into work after around 6 months out of work. During his time of unemployment he arranged IT classes in the local community center, free of charge. There may have only been 4 or 5 people at each class he gave, but sure, according to you, this was no contribution.
Alright quick example 1 in 5 people in West Belfast are on DLA is that a good start for you?
Silence Ceannaire?