raven: [hello my name is] and a silhouette image of a raven (doctor who - small amy)
[personal profile] raven
I am a little terrified that people are being turned away from polling stations. However, I'm not convinced that the returning officers had a right to extend the hours of polling. The only reference I have found so far is this:

[From The Representation of the People Act 1983, Sch 1, Part I Provisions as to Time:]

Polling. In the case of a general election, between the hours of 7 in the morning and 10 at night on the [eleventh] day after the last day for delivery of nomination papers.

That's it. No discretionary power of the returning officer to extend it. Polling is between 7am and 10pm.

That said, my research is a little wine-soaked. Can anyone cite me different chapter and verse?

I did a good thing, though. My flatmate, who hasn't ever voted before and didn't know that you don't need the polling card, said, "I haven't voted, I thought I couldn't."

It was 9.50pm.

I said I would come with her. We ran. We ran inside, we grabbed keys, grabbed bikes, grabbed lights, cycled down the Cowley Road at approximately a million miles an hour, dodged buses, taxis, pedestrians and Tesco lorries, and we flew into the polling station.

By which point it was 9.57pm. The returning officers were calm as my flatmate skidded in. Three more people drifted in while I was waiting, and they were closing up on a deserted room at ten as we left. It was eerie; the whole night is eerie, nothing but electoral shadows.

Someone on Radio 4 just said: "I was wrong, David Cameron hasn't gone to his count, he's gone to the pub."

on 2010-05-06 11:46 pm (UTC)
ext_20950: Jed Bartlet - I'm a lily-livered, bleeding heart liberal egghead (liberal egghead)
Posted by [identity profile] jacinthsong.livejournal.com
This is what I think. So much to criticise, lack of preparation etc, but I'm getting irked by people saying the stations should just have stayed open. Right, so some people would have extra opportunity to vote than others based on some returning officer's decision?

/gin soaked and not a lawyer

on 2010-05-06 11:47 pm (UTC)
ext_20950: CJ Cregg - Learning is delightful and delicious, as by the way am I (learning is delightful and delicious)
Posted by [identity profile] jacinthsong.livejournal.com
Also, your flatmate's story is lovely <3<3<3

on 2010-05-06 11:49 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] bookwormsarah.livejournal.com
This has potential to be a terrifying night. I did wonder what time people who were turned away had started to queue, but it seems like they arrived well in advance of close of polls.

I may be a little beer-soaked myself, affecting coherency...it doesn't take much, and offsets the worry a little...

on 2010-05-06 11:57 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] loneraven.livejournal.com
Yeah, it's a matter of law. I don't think the people saying those things understand that. It's a shambles of organisation, obviously.

Love you! Need moar boozes.

on 2010-05-07 12:00 am (UTC)
ext_7899: the tenth doctor stands alone (eyes that speak trouble: Eleven)
Posted by [identity profile] rhipowered.livejournal.com
Might depend on your definition of 'extend'. I know in the US, at least in my bit of it, if you're waiting at closing time (varies by state), you still get to vote, as you were intentionally there before the specified shut time.

There may end up being a case or two of law around this night, to which I wish this country good luck of it. I hate Election Law.

on 2010-05-07 12:07 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] loneraven.livejournal.com
According to the ROPA, it's not the same here. It's just, constitutional law is vital, you have to observe it - otherwise what would be the point of the whole thing? I'm worried.

(Oh, wait, Radio 4 has brought on the Electoral Commission spokesperson...)

on 2010-05-07 12:08 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] loneraven.livejournal.com
(I was absolutely sure I had answered this comment! I blame the WINE OMG.)

It's kind of a travesty that not everyone who wanted to vote could, isn't it? But I don't know that the returning officers had the right to do anything about it.

on 2010-05-07 12:13 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] rosariotijeras.livejournal.com
The turning people away thing is fascinating and scary. Is there any precedent for a nation-wide...what's the term...I am beer-soaked...er...second try election with a proper number of ballot papers? That seems to be the really bad thing here. Some constituencies didn't have enough fucking ballot papers.

Anyway, I am heartily enjoying this and hope the results are to your liking.

on 2010-05-07 12:14 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] marymac.livejournal.com
Nope, they have no discretion. Mind you the Electoral Commission are being extremely disapproving of the under-prepared polling stations. It's not like they don't know how many people are coming, honestly.

And if the queue is building two hours before closing it really isn't that hard to borrow warm bodies from the count centre and get the paperwork done in the queue.

Massive idiocy all around.

on 2010-05-07 12:19 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] bookwormsarah.livejournal.com
Terrible that people were turned away, but I agree that returning officers couldn't really do anything about it. There has been the suggestion of a challenge over the polling station who stayed open for ten minutes longer so that all could cast, as well as over the places where people were locked out. There is no real precedent, is there?

on 2010-05-07 12:20 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] subservient-son.livejournal.com
I agree with you (unsurprisingly), I'm also wondering how many people voted so late because they genuinely couldn't get there earlier (I've spent all day trying to get people to vote, so my perspective is skewed).

Why terrified, because people are contravening the law?

on 2010-05-07 12:21 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] loneraven.livejournal.com
Nooo, not as far as I know. Turnouts have been low, rather than the reverse, and each polling station is supposed to be more than capable of dealing with the amount of people.

(I'm glad you're enjoying it, sincerely! I cannot imagine what it must look like from your perspective.)

on 2010-05-07 12:22 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] loneraven.livejournal.com
No, not because of that exactly, but that there can be this degree of incompetence coupled with a general lack of awareness of constitutional law. I mean, I know not everyone nurses a healthy interest in English constitutional law - I do know it's what I do for a living and whatnot! - but one would hope that today of all days, other people would Get It Right!

(so wine soaked omg. sorry for ramble.)

on 2010-05-07 12:24 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] loneraven.livejournal.com
And well they might be! Disapproval is the only possibly response to that kind of idiocy. Have you heard this rumour that Sheffield Hallam is thinking of declaring a by-election later? I cannot even begin to imagine the consequences of that...

on 2010-05-07 12:36 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] rosariotijeras.livejournal.com
In a word? Fascinating! It's a little amusing to watch the country collectively lose its shit at the thought of a power-sharing government (I don't know if you could call the US government a coalition government in the sense that the rest of Europe uses it, but it's similar) but also quite disturbing to think about the legal implications that could leave the UK without a government. If, in the coming weeks, there is a hung parliament or legal challenges, a comparison between this and the 2000 US election would be fascinating. The implications for Scotland are also fascinating, especially if there is a Conservative government and the SNP wins in the next Scottish elections. They will almost certainly push for an independence referendum in that case (as if they wouldn't anyway).

The BBC's coverage is also very classy, and dare I say it, very British. No holograms in sight (coughCNNcough)!

on 2010-05-07 12:42 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] marymac.livejournal.com
It might be the only thing they can do, I don't think they can dump the late votes (I don't know if England do the ballot number timestamps the way we do), so if the whole thing is decalred invalid...

I am not winesoaked, but Naomi Long just took East Belfast for the Alliance and managed to make history on about six levels and I think between her and Lady Sylvia Hermon being icily nasty about David Cameron I may be about to die of feminist pride.

on 2010-05-07 12:42 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] loneraven.livejournal.com
I... just don't know. I mean, I've been studying politics formally in some sense for the last seven years, and I still don't think I know anything about how this country works, save that it does, and that seems to be what the academics think, too! I mean, it's always evolutionary, not revolutionary, it's always conventions not constitutions, common law not statute. So there's this sort of theory-and-knowledge vacuum coming, and that's scary.

(Ah, I love the BBC. I have been listening to Radio 4 for the last five hours. It's good.)

on 2010-05-07 12:55 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] subservient-son.livejournal.com
Well, just look at what people have been saying about the constitution/election system. Everyone's just saying what is to their advantage.i find it infuriating, personally.

on 2010-05-07 10:41 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] rosariotijeras.livejournal.com
Morning has dawned, and the country is still losing it. Muhahahaha.

on 2010-05-07 11:47 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] loneraven.livejournal.com
That would be the sight of imminent Tory government that's doing that.

January 2026

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021 222324
25262728293031

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 30th, 2026 03:23 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios