Hey, I've taken a look at my Postal Vote letters that arrived recently. Frankly I am rather confused by the contents. I have voted by post before so, have a general idea. But the problem is I cannot figure what the contents are for
I have 1 AV ticket, which is self explanatory enough. But also in the AV envelope I have a list of 7 candidates on yellow paper and asks for 2 choices.
In a second envelope I have another list of 13 candidates on purple paper and asks for 4 choices.
Could somebody shed some light on what the 2 different lists of candidates are for? Is what I have received correct?
Apart from the lists, there is no explanation of what they are for in the envelope. For reference I am in Victoria Ward and the back of both lists state the correct ward.
Hey, I've taken a look at my Postal Vote letters that arrived recently. Frankly I am rather confused by the contents. I have voted by post before so, have a general idea. But the problem is I cannot figure what the contents are for
I have 1 AV ticket, which is self explanatory enough. But also in the AV envelope I have a list of 7 candidates on yellow paper and asks for 2 choices. This is for you to choose 2 of the candidates to represent you on West Berkshire Council. These are the councillors for Market Street who make all of the major decisions for Newbury (and West Berkshire).
In a second envelope I have another list of 13 candidates on purple paper and asks for 4 choices. This is for you to choose 4 of the candidates to represent you on Newbury Town Council. These are the councillors for the Town Hall who look after the more mundane issues like allotments, cemeteries and hanging baskets.
Could somebody shed some light on what the 2 different lists of candidates are for? Is what I have received correct?
Apart from the lists, there is no explanation of what they are for in the envelope. For reference I am in Victoria Ward and the back of both lists state the correct ward.
Hey, I've taken a look at my Postal Vote letters that arrived recently. Frankly I am rather confused by the contents. I have voted by post before so, have a general idea. But the problem is I cannot figure what the contents are for
I have 1 AV ticket, which is self explanatory enough. But also in the AV envelope I have a list of 7 candidates on yellow paper and asks for 2 choices.
In a second envelope I have another list of 13 candidates on purple paper and asks for 4 choices.
Could somebody shed some light on what the 2 different lists of candidates are for? Is what I have received correct?
Apart from the lists, there is no explanation of what they are for in the envelope. For reference I am in Victoria Ward and the back of both lists state the correct ward.
Thanx
You are not the first person I have heard who has been confused by this.
You are not the first person I have heard who has been confused by this.
I think the major problem for a lot of voters is they don't understand the difference between the Town Council and West Berks council. The assumption a lot of people make is that the Town Council with a mayor and all the other trappings are the ruling body. A friend had a planning application in for some minor stuff and assumed that after the Town Council had said that they approved his work that that was it. I had to tell him that it wasn't the case but I'm not sure he really grasped even then the difference.
I think the major problem for a lot of voters is they don't understand the difference between the Town Council and West Berks council. The assumption a lot of people make is that the Town Council with a mayor and all the other trappings are the ruling body. A friend had a planning application in for some minor stuff and assumed that after the Town Council had said that they approved his work that that was it. I had to tell him that it wasn't the case but I'm not sure he really grasped even then the difference.
Perhaps people are fortunate that the right to vote is not subject to an intelligence test.
Why would anyone bother? People tend to vote according to party lines
Precisely what is wrong about our democracy - people are voting for someone to represent them but they elect someone who will ignore their best interests if it conflicts with the intructions they receive from their party bosses.
The government have an opportunity now before the next local government elections (not this one) to do away with westminter politics, cliques and cartels in local councils. It would reduce the number of councillors needed to run the business, and would for once and all do away with the us and them bickering which seems to fill their election rubbish that gets shoved through letterboxes either printed in blue or yellow. Councillors could then work to the agenda of their ward and not, as already been said, some local jobsworth who has the 'power'.
Price fixing isn't allowed so why not policy fixing.
Let's get rid of the roles of leader and chairman, and replace with an elected mayor = SAVINGS and more accountability. We should also reduce the number of elected members to around the thirty mark, and we should also introduce the requirement of a monthly surgery in each ward.
As for advice on filling out a postal vote, put an "x" next to the Labour candidate (s)
Precisely what is wrong about our democracy - people are voting for someone to represent them but they elect someone who will ignore their best interests if it conflicts with the intructions they receive from their party bosses.
How so? If I broadly believe in socialist values I will vote Labour. If I am a capitalist and believe in individual freedom I will vote Conservative or these days LibDem too. I am not daft enough to believe that someone I vote for can represent everything I stand for. Why should I bother to learn the name of the person the party have selected to stand? On that basis I'd probably never vote for anyone at all. They are all self serving.
I met that Richard Garvie chap the other day in town and pointed it to him that he is totally deluded if he thinks Labour will win any seats around here. Personally I liked him though from what I saw. So who should I vote for now? The local Labour candidate? He might be and most likely is a sloganeering twazzock. To date no one has knocked on my door and if they did they'd be given short shrift.
So given the fairly limited number of people I know and my limited attention span it's unlikely I would know my local councillor. Therefore my only option would be to vote along party lines.
As it happens I won't vote at all. I binned my polling card. It makes no difference where my vote goes locally as everything is decided by people that we don't elect. Local democracy is a myth.
Precisely what is wrong about our democracy - people are voting for someone to represent them but they elect someone who will ignore their best interests if it conflicts with the intructions they receive from their party bosses.
Hey, I've taken a look at my Postal Vote letters that arrived recently. Frankly I am rather confused by the contents. I have voted by post before so, have a general idea. But the problem is I cannot figure what the contents are for
I have 1 AV ticket, which is self explanatory enough. But also in the AV envelope I have a list of 7 candidates on yellow paper and asks for 2 choices.
In a second envelope I have another list of 13 candidates on purple paper and asks for 4 choices.
Could somebody shed some light on what the 2 different lists of candidates are for? Is what I have received correct?
Apart from the lists, there is no explanation of what they are for in the envelope. For reference I am in Victoria Ward and the back of both lists state the correct ward.
...I should declare that I am one of the 4 Apolitical candidates..
I like the idea of an apolitical party. There's an episode of The West Wing in which President Bartlet is interviewing a possible candidate for the Supreme Court. Bartlet asks the judge for his opinion on an important issue, I forget which, and he replies with words to the effect of "I don't have an opinion on that. I don't have 'opinions' on anything like that - I wait to see the facts, weigh them up and then come to a conclusion". It's pretty much the opposite of how political parties work.
I like the idea of an apolitical party. There's an episode of The West Wing in which President Bartlet is interviewing a possible candidate for the Supreme Court. Bartlet asks the judge for his opinion on an important issue, I forget which, and he replies with words to the effect of "I don't have an opinion on that. I don't have 'opinions' on anything like that - I wait to see the facts, weigh them up and then come to a conclusion". It's pretty much the opposite of how political parties work.
"The Apolitical Democrats are, by definition apolitical, ‘politically neutral, unbiased, non-aligned’, and democrats ‘believers in the democratic right of people to choose who represents them in government’. Our aim is to provide a counter balance to discredited, big-party tribal politics."
Does what it say on the tin. END Quote
A dictionary definition of Politics. The methods or tactics involved in managing a state or government:
So are you saying you wouldn't have a clue how to manage the council?? Sounds like the current lot to me!!
Nobby you are conflating 'politics' with 'party politics'.
'Apolitical' describes a convention of impartiality amongst people active in politics, like the Speaker of the Commons, the Cross-Benchers in the Lords or most parish councillors, who are not subject to the party 'whip' or told what to think by a political party.
Being Apolitical doesn't mean apathy or lack of interest in democracy or local affairs. Even Newbury Town Council drescribes the role of Mayor as apolitical.
I like the idea of an apolitical party. There's an episode of The West Wing in which President Bartlet is interviewing a possible candidate for the Supreme Court. Bartlet asks the judge for his opinion on an important issue, I forget which, and he replies with words to the effect of "I don't have an opinion on that. I don't have 'opinions' on anything like that - I wait to see the facts, weigh them up and then come to a conclusion". It's pretty much the opposite of how political parties work.
You have absolutely identified what we are trying to do!
Sorry Nobby - hope I didn't seem pedantic .... [hangs head in shame]!
Still lovely day campaigning in Victoria! Some really fragrant front gardens - in particular a wicket gate on Boundary Road smothered with the most exquisitely scented wisteria that one had to brush through. Lovely in the sunshine!
I do find the concept of the Apolitical Party more than a little confusing - a political party that is against party politics?
The absurdity of having to register as a political party under electoral law in order to identify ourselves as a group with a shared belief in the counterproductivity of political parties is not wasted on us!
But registering as a political party is allowing a way of joining together to provide mutual support through the electoral process - which is more than a bit fiddly as the trials and tribulations of the Labour party in getting all their candidates registered bears out - and hopefully afterwards in office.
It's also a way of flagging up to the electorate a mutual belief in an open mind. We as Apoliticals don’t believe that the task of our councillors is to support or oppose the big name tribal parties just for the sake of it. We believe that our elected representatives should be exactly that - the representatives of the wishes of the people.
As I say we believe we should be guided by our electors' wishes, considered evidence, our real world experience and expertise, and our consciences.
So, for the sake of transparency you describe all cyclists as 'smackheads on stolen bikes'? I cycle . . . I'm not a smackhead.
Plus, your Apolitical flyer talks about ''housing associations destroying family homes & gardens, replacing them with blocks of so-called 'affordable' housing''. I would suggest your wording is inflammatory and likely to alienate sensible voters in the wards you say you want to represent. Housing policy is decided by the ruling Conservative West Berkshire administration, not the Liberal Democrat Town Council. If you and your colleagues want to represent the electorate it helps if you try and understand the difference!
Are you sure you're not BNP candidates in disguise?
My biggest gripe with Democracy is it has essentially become a token gesture once every 4 years to choose the national color. Apart from this, there is very rare actual consultation taking place in any meaningful way. What I would like to see, is instead of people who were born with everything and having no perception of what the world is like for the majority making decisions for us in their ivory towers. For all issues to be debated in a way that everybody can be involved and the final result is what everybody who took part decides.
What I would like to see, is instead of people who were born with everything and having no perception of what the world is like for the majority making decisions for us in their ivory towers.
Imagine 600 or so John Prescots. In essence I agree, but a referendum on every issue is impractical and would ultimately be worse. A bit more consultation in constituencies (focus groups, polls etc) would be useful though. @Course, we'd have to allow more in expenses for that.
Female
Logged
Male
