Donate SIGN UP

Time we had compulsory voting?

Avatar Image
rod | 00:11 Wed 27th Apr 2005 | News
24 Answers

Should we have a referendum on compulsory voting.

Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 24rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by rod. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
rod would we have to vote in the referendum?
Question Author
THECORBYLOON I should have put
Should we have a referendum on compulsory voting if there is a yes vote, then we should have another referendum on whether to keep compulsory voting.
depends whether you wish to live in a democracy or not . . .

Yes I think it is a good idea, have a look at this

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3050120

No.  We should not have compulsory voting, and nor should we have a referendum on it.  The freedom not to vote is just as important as the freedom to vote.

Definitely not!

What are the benefits of compulsory voting?

�But I don�t do politics �well we all do one way or another. One of the benefits of compulsory voting is we all get the government the majority has voted for. I don�t like the idea of proportional representation as you end up with weak government just look at the situation in, Italy an election every six months!

Well it creates yet another wholly unnecessary offence that you can be prosecuted for, along with not filling a SORN form when you keep you car untaxed off the road and many others. Clearly if such a law were to be passed there would have to be a "None of the Above" box to vote for, and you already know I would like that bit.
Imagine what would they do if there were such a law, and nobody voted? Lock us all up? Now that is a policy which the current government seems to be pursuing anyway.

The benefits are that we would get a true represenatation of what the country thinks. Politicians would not be able to claim a mandate from getting 40% of the vote in a 57% turnout, for example. They might actually try and work together, or come up with good ways of doing things. As long as their is a box that is 'none of the above' for you to tick I don't see why it should be a problem. Also fining non-voters would raise funds and could reduce some forms of tax (though even I would cast a cynical eye at that).

Could someone explain what the benefits of the current system are? It strikes me that the right not to vote is the right to be told what to do, or the right to have a government imposed on you. The compulsory system provides a much better way of showing you protest in my opinion. This way you will not be lumped together with those who can't be bothered to vote.

Italy got rid of PR about 10 years ago and has had about two or three governments in that time. Ireland has PR and coalition governments. They have consensus politics and far less bickering in their parliament. Everyone is fairly represented.

As elgroucho says, I think there is nothing wrong in compulsory voting so long as you can choose to abstain - that way you can preserve your freedom to not vote and still get a more representative view of the country. I'm sure if it was compulsory more people who would not normally vote would vote for a party than abstain.

However, how would you enforce a compulsory vote? And what would you suggest as a punishment for not voting?

They have compulsory voting in Australia, as far as I know they don't take harsh measures to make sure everyone votes, but those who do not are fined (I think). I presume this money goes to their exchequer.

how about we let the 17 year olds vote instead?

i fail to see how being born 41 days "too late" makes my political opinion on our country's leadership completely irrelevant. *grumble grumble*

I think voting should be compulsory. I believe there is no such thing as a 'wasted' vote. I will be voting for a minority party who have no hope of getting in but, even though I don't agree with absolutely everything they say, they are the party whose opinions are closest to my own. Vote for what you believe in. Find the party with the opinions that match - or mostly match - your own, and vote for them whether you think they will 'win' or not.

the french system of voting is pretty good - you vote for the party you support in the first round, and the second round is a 'lesser-of-two-evils' vote. here, it seems that many people compromise their stance by voting for one of the top two parties, which sets up a cycle that results in the majority of people voting for labour or cons, regardless of whether they represent their views or not.

 

(can i have a vote now?)

Without a "None of The Above" option, definitely not, particularly given the fact that the main parties offer virtually the same policies, differing only through subtle tones.

Having to vote for which of the parties I would like to sell off the NHS to private business, or which one I would like to see implement draconian asylum quotas is not something I would want to be forced to do.
I can only echo what Bernardo said:

"No. We should not have compulsory voting, and nor should we have a referendum on it. The freedom not to vote is just as important as the freedom to vote."

No we shouldn't.  I have never voted in a general election, I don't feel that I know enough about politics to cast a vote for any particular party.  Yes, I am aware that I should take an interest but hey, this question isn't about that.

So, if voting were compulsory, I would abstain.  Surely this is the same as not voting in the first place?

I cannot understand why folk think we should be compelled to vote. Even if the option of abstaining were not available under a compulsory system, a ballot paper could be spoilt deliberately. How would the new system be policed? Would there be enquiries made, forms filled out, appeals against fines etc etc. IHow much would it cost to administer. The entitlement to vote is indeed a right which has been ours for many generations but in a democracy it is also our right NOT to vote. 

But I don�t do politics �well we all do one way or another. One of the benefits of compulsory voting is we all get the government the majority has voted for. I don�t like the idea of proportional representation as you end up with weak government just look at the situation in, Italy an election every six months!

No, we wouldn't get a government which the majority has voted for - because even with a turnout of 100% the winning party would probably still only have about 40% of the votes.  In Italy they do not have "an election every six months".  In Italy there have been fewer general elections since 1945 than in the UK.  In Italy, most governments had a broad basde of support under PR.  Under PR, no fascist or communist parties were ever in government.  Since Italy abolished PR, most governments have included elements of former fascist or communist parties.

1 to 20 of 24rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Time we had compulsory voting?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.