Postal voting gripes!

[sid]

[quote user="idun"]

Well she was wrong about me, I never ever voted for 'her', but I always voted.

[/quote]

Oh well, mine cancelled out yours then. [:P]

[idun]

My Dad still 'loves' Maggie. I never understood her or her politics, they never felt good, right or fair to me.

[Rabbie]

[quote user="idun"]My Dad still 'loves' Maggie. I never understood her or her politics, they never felt good, right or fair to me.[/quote]That's because they weren't[:)]

[idun]

I agree, but my Dad still thinks that she is the best thing ever.

I have friends who liked Maggie and they liked Blair too as they found him just the same as her. And do you know what, actually I did too, he never felt good, right or fair to me either[:-))]

[Rabbie]

Much to the irritation of many tories, Maggie was always a Blair fan and regarded him as her true successor

[Mr Coeur de Lion]

Couldn't stand Blair, but he had a brain on him. He certainly knew when to quit!

[Quillan]

[quote user="Rabbie"]Much to the irritation of many tories, Maggie was always a Blair fan and regarded him as her true successor[/quote]

I am afraid this was somewhat miss quoted. It was Lord Hattersley who hated both Thatcher and Blair who branded Tony Blair the true heir of Margaret Thatcher back in Jan 2003 on the GMTV program "because of his belief in competition and the market – even in public services such as health, secondary education and universities.". He also said that Blair " had done much that was deeply offensive to the rank and file (of the labour party)" and was astonished that he had managed to hang on to power for so long. You can read his comments in the link to The Independent below.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hattersley-brands-blair-as-thatchers-true-heir-596282.html

As for his comments about Brown well they were incorrect. Browns attitude (this from a man who admitted he didn't really know much about money) to the UK recession was to throw money at it by borrowing and using the tax payer as security. He tried to get France and Germany to do the same. They ignored him and threw a little at 'it' whilst he threw a lot and continued to do so. France and Germany's attitude was to throw a little and see what happened, they were the first two countries to get out of the recession and saved a lot on not having to borrow so much as well. The UK is still hovering on the edge of recession and things are not going well as indicated by the value of sterling, it plunged again after the last growth rate figures locking the interest rates where they are and of course inflation will continue to rise as a result. This is Blairs legacy but then does he care, of course not, he is still making a shed load of money telling people how to run an economy and the fools believe him.

[Rabbie]

IIRC This remark of Thatcher's was actually made in the early 1990's before Blair became leader of the labour party. This is probably the reason that Hattersley used this expression. Blair's father was certainly a devoted Thatcher fan.   

[Quillan]

Well I don't know about that and I can't find any reference anywhere. What I do know is that Blair savagely attacked Thatcher in a speech in May 2000 on the 10th anniversary of her departure from Number 10. This followed a blistering attack on him by her the previous year because of his pro European attitude where as she was a very pro the US. Strange really as Blair had more 'friends' in the US when he left power than Thatcher. Blair, as he admitted, wanted to write Thatcher out of history. On the other hand many people did wonder about Blair and Thatcher because of his economic policies especially with regards to the public sector. He also admired Thatcher, as did Wilson (because he failed), for 'breaking' the unions something they and other PM's across parties had tried in the past to do but lost. For instance had Callaghan not have fought Wilson and won  over the enacting of the white paper "In place of strife" which aimed at dramatically reducing union power we would not have had the 'Winter of Discontent' and probably Thatcher would never have become PM.

[idun]

Does it really matter what Blair said about Thatcher, in the opinion of my friends, he acted like her and they were happy with that and that is why they started voting labour instead of tory. They didn't like Brown and will have voted tory again at the last election, of that I am sure.

Me, with family in his old constituancy, I asked family members to not vote him in again. But as retirees they said that they liked him, so what can you do when decent people say and do such things, it is a democracy at the end of the day.

 

[powerdesal]

[quote user="idun"]

I would actually disenfranchise everyone over 75. Please bear in mind that I am not young. The reasoning isn't complicated and quite easy to work out.

 

15 Years now to vote in national elections when abroad, used to be 20 Years.

[/quote] Idun, why not advocate going the whole hog and euthanase the over 75s, after all if you don't think they should have a democratic say in their own country, and they cost the young working people money by drawing their pensions and using the state medical health care facilities - what use are they?

[Rabbie]

[quote user="Quillan"]Well I don't know about that and I can't find any reference anywhere. [/quote]As I have never been a fan of either I may well have remembered wrong. Certainly don't want to quarrel about this when I am relying an increasingly quirky memory[:D]. 

[idun]

powerdesal, I reckon that natural selection and lack of ressources will take care of our 'futures' really.

So no need to talk about euthanasia at all.

[confused of chalus]

Bringing this thread back to the top. We have registered with our last council to vote in the upcoming elections, very easy, mostly online. BUT. The small print on the postal voting application says that the ballot papers may not be posted out until FOUR days before the election - so they probably won't even get to us before the date, let alone allow us to reply.

What is the good of that?

I know that one can get some one to vote for you, but you have to register in the last place you were on the electoral register, and we weren't there long enough to know anyone well enough to a) ask and b) trust!

Sorry, I know I am just saying what was said in 2011, but honestly, in this day and age don't you think there has to be a better way?

[nectarine]

Just back to my original posting .... having learned my lesson - i.e. don't trust a postal vote to be sent to you in time - we have now assigned our proxy vote to a member of the political party who lives in our constituency. So at least we know our votes will be cast!

But there should be a fairer and easier system ...

[woolybanana]

Why? They don't want you to vote, or it would have been made easier. As a person living abroad you don't count at all, so get used to it. Proof? Well, over the years there have been a number of attempts to have separate MP's representing expats but the idea has always been voted down, by all parties.

Another proof is the treatment of expat pensioners in the old dominions whose pensions have been frozen

The French have them and it seems to work, so why not the Brits.

I could go on but it is a lovely day in Brussels and the park beckons.

[idun]

Interesting seeing this post again. As I said, we did a proxy vote and it worked for us.

On the electoral commission web site, it says this:

Postal votes can be sent overseas, but you need to consider whether

there will be enough time to receive and return your ballot paper by

election day.

Not as if they are 'hiding' this fact that the postal system can be rather poor, it is in the UK and it most certainly is in France.

My father is doing a postal vote this year so I'll pay attention to when his papers arrive.

[Hereford]

We don't worry to get a postal vote sent to us but use a proxy who then gets a postal vote for him to vote on our behalf.  This way the proxy need not be in the same town - ours is but votes in a different ward.

I have never failed to vote in any election since I qualified to vote 50 years ago and don't intend to start until I lose my vote in 2017 having been here then for 15 years!

Mrs H

[Gardengirl]

[quote user="confused of chalus"]Bringing this thread back to the top. We have registered with our last council to vote in the upcoming elections, very easy, mostly online. BUT. The small print on the postal voting application says that the ballot papers may not be posted out until FOUR days before the election - so they probably won't even get to us before the date, let alone allow us to reply.

What is the good of that?

I know that one can get some one to vote for you, but you have to register in the last place you were on the electoral register, and we weren't there long enough to know anyone well enough to a) ask and b) trust!

Sorry, I know I am just saying what was said in 2011, but honestly, in this day and age don't you think there has to be a better way?[/quote]

Did you receive a card a few weeks ago, which had to be signed and returned? Our mail is redirected to our son's home a day later than it would have arrived at our English home, and received cards from him when we were back in England, signed them and returned them. Our polling cards have always arrived in plenty of time for our son to send on to us in France and for us to return them. I don't recall any mention of 4 days, which seems beyond reason.

[idun]

 A family member used to vote for us and they did not live in the same electoral 'district' as us. No idea exactly who they voted for or where, we only asked them to vote for a certain party and that was it. Did it for years, as I think we got twenty years voting rights back then.