- Location
- Beragh, Co Tyrone, Northern Ireland
Never dull.
Peterborough
- Thread starter baabaa
- Start date
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
Look at what EU citizens had to deal with. From what I hear only around 200,000 of the 3 million EU nationals in the UK managed to get though all the hurdles put in place to vote in the EU elections. Whereas around 1.2 million had previously voted in 2009 despite there being less of them in the country.
That is unfair, the rules for voting in the EU elections as a foreign national are complex. They are only allowed to vote once but they can vote in either their home or adopted country. It has to be checked through and the time schedule thanks to the Brexit debacle, meant it was extremely tight. If anything the EU citizens here should have thought earlier and applied for votes in there home countries, which I expect many had. We did in my polling station have several non ( I guess as I have no way of knowing ) British citizens voting so it certainly did work if they applied in time.
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
Except it is the same staff on all day!
I know, I was one.
I am sure that contravenes some working time directiveExcept it is the same staff on all day!
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
This seems to suggest we should be less rigourous. In who can cant vote!
The voting system we have is made more complex by the fact that only certain people can vote in a UK election
The Monarch and any member of the Lords cannot vote in a UK general election, nor can non resident non nationals, except residents of the Irish republic. Some of these can vote in Council elections all EU nationals can and some non EU nationals provided they have certain familial connections. So it is very complex.
At EU elections there are another broad range , as I said above but they can only vote once, many EU countries allow all residents a vote in all elections , others have residency qualifications
We did actually have one very interesting voter at our polling station but I cannot say too much as it might be wrong to do so. Suffice to say they were legally voting, but were temporarily here from a third country. I was surprised and checked out afterwards how they qualified and it was all above board.
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
I was surprised, I volunteered after a call from a desperate family member who helps in these things, it was only when I had signed up, I realised it was for for a 17 hour day at minimum wages.I am sure that contravenes some working time directive
It must have been a very interesting experience but I am still convinced that it is open to large scale corruption simply because of the lack of identity screening.
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
I would agree that in a large polling station with several thousand coming through there is a possibility and I expect does happen occasionally, but I would be surprised if it existed to any large extent and would be picked up by the officers on the day if it was common. Remember every person coming g through the door has to give a name and address this is then double checked against the register and they are ticked off. So if anyone turns up who has already been ticked off then questions are raised immediately, the Presiding officer is informed and appropriate action taken. I suspect there is a certain amount of voluntary personation occurring where people give their card to others to vote deliberately, as they cannot get to the station. Of course if they bother a proxy can very easily be appointed for you
- Location
- Limousin/Charentes toad land
Yes it is. We use said herbicide here on the mainland.
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
it is not uncommon to have chemistry available in other countries before UK
We trialled A potato herbicide for 4 years
The first year, the company ( forget which one) came out checked for weeds and that was it.
Second year the rules had changed, so all the potatoes were harvested from the plot, then chucked in a hole to compost.
The third year the rules had changed again and there potatoes were bagged up taken away and incinerated.
same for the fourth year.
next year the chemical was approved.
All this time the chemical was approved and used on potatoes and Maize in France.
Danllan
Member
- Location
- Sir Gar / Carms
Do you mean Roe v Roe in re homosexuality* or Roe v Wade in re abortion?
*& the superbly named & related case of Bottoms v Bottoms
(you couldn't make a better one up!)Certainly do in my Industry and my areas of leisure interests
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Do you mean Roe v Roe in re homosexuality* or Roe v Wade in re abortion?
*& the superbly named & related case of Bottoms v Bottoms
yep, managed to muddle that quiz question reply!! thanks for catching me out. Goodness knows where my small quota of grey matter conflated the two!! But my gaffes never cease to amaze me. My age is my defence!?
Best wishes,
Danllan
Member
- Location
- Sir Gar / Carms
I wasn't trying to catch you out. Since both cases are relevant to the loony religious right in the US, I was hoping to find out which one you meant, I assume it was Roe v Wade (abortion) rather than Roe v Roe (homosexual custody of children).
The problem the US didn't have for a very long time - thanks to its constitution - was direct religious interference in politics, I fear that is approaching its end...
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I wasn't trying to catch you out. Since both cases are relevant to the loony religious right in the US, I was hoping to find out which one you meant, I assume it was Roe v Wade (abortion) rather than Roe v Roe (homosexual custody of children).
The problem the US didn't have for a very long time - thanks to its constitution - was direct religious interference in politics, I fear that is approaching its end...
Sorry, yes, I did not think you were catching me out as such. It was the abortion one. Sorry. I just find it pretty awful that women are not allowed to have freedom of choice. While I accept readily that a few women may make the wrong choice and that the unborn child may have no say to remove the freedoms just to me seems to take society back so many years.
I concur with your observation that we seem to be living through a period when religion has gained political traction after so many decades of retreat.
Hey ho, Best wishes,
Scribus
Member
- Location
- Central Atlantic
There is more than enough identity screening going on in general as it is, we need less of it, not more.
well if it isnt food or cars then they are bugger all then so why would they make a huge difference, currency fluctuations are bigger
Scribus
Member
- Location
- Central Atlantic
I wasn't trying to catch you out. Since both cases are relevant to the loony religious right in the US, I was hoping to find out which one you meant, I assume it was Roe v Wade (abortion) rather than Roe v Roe (homosexual custody of children).
The problem the US didn't have for a very long time - thanks to its constitution - was direct religious interference in politics, I fear that is approaching its end...
I would have thought that the procession of US presidents who have proclaimed and sought to uphold Christian values is very much an indication of strong religious influence, if not directly by established church leaders then certainly by proxy. It is worth noting from the recent images of the Normandy cemeteries that that all the fallen were buried under a cross.
- Tags
- drift establishment lexion roots