I am very impressed by how organised the borough council has got about elections since I left.
In my last year there was a general concern about two things which sound mutually exclusive but are not: how difficult it was to attract more people to become candidates and how often people would become candidates without knowing what was involved and them being poor candidates or even councillors through not being prepared.
This was not a partisan thing. We wanted to get more candidates of a higher quality, and I think all the parties could identify with that. If it meant that the council was not over-representing old men then so much the better. At one point the democratic services department organised some open evenings. They would explain to anyone interested in possibly becoming a councillor what it all means and give them a tour of the town hall. As part of the event there were presentations from a couple of existing councillors to describe their own experiences.
I did one, which I greatly enjoyed. Having been an actor years ago I still like to perform when I get the chance, and these days presentations and public speaking is about the only chance I ever get. It went well enough and if anyone asked me how to go about getting elected I told them that they would stand more chance statistically if they were a member of an established party and it was worth joining one if there was one they sympathised with enough, but pointed out that it was not compulsory.
Given the number of independent candidates sprinkled around the elections in Crawley this year, making them a lot harder to predict, it looks like there was some degree of success. Whether it has a detrimental effect on us (Labour) or not, it can only be a good thing to have more people involved and engaged like that.
But I digress… once my nomination papers were handed in and checked I received a confirmation letter, with a 20-page book explaining everything about elections. In colour. I’ve never had that before. As a member of a political party I get a lot of support. A lot of what is in the book is handled for me by my agent who has a lot of experience, but I imagine that this book would be very useful for anyone new to the whole thing.
At the nomination stage there was also a lot of information available to help you fill out the forms correctly, and to tell you what to do and when to do it. I didn’t really see a lot of that as our agent handled it all, but it really must make it all a lot easier for the newcomer.
If the intention was to make it less daunting to get involved in local politics then I think it has worked. Mr Symonds, as a seasoned Independent, would be in a better position to say whether my opinion is correct here, but I think the effect is to make the council more open. All this information makes you feel more welcome and not like an interloper.
I imagine there was a scrutiny panel or something involved in all this, as well as other aspects of elections and its good to see some constructive results instead of being distracted by arguments about encouraging postal voting.
I will be even happier if they also looked at how the counts are managed and why Crawley always takes so long.
I think it has worked to some extent, Skuds. That new CBC Booklet for Candidates is very useful. The procedure is pretty simple to follow now, although I did need quite a bit of help from (a very helpful)’Democratic Services’ in the early days.
As an Independent, I have never been openly ‘scrutinised’ (eg an interview) – I assume they do checks ‘behind the scenes’ (bankruptcy, criminal record etc). Don’t know.
I was greatly encouraged b someone standing as an Independent in Furnace Green – I assume to draw away voters from BNP. Good idea – it worked in Ifield !
‘One issue’ Independents don’t stand much of a chance (and can damagingly split the vote eg Greens/Southgate) – the West Green Hospital Campaigner might do that. I might do that in Ifield as well. I hope not.
We shall see..
I am certain that candidates are not checked for the criminal records etc. 80% of them won’t be councillors so it would be a wasted effort. Even when elected I don’t think such checks are made routinely.
The system depends on two things: an honour system and politicians having enemies who will turn that sort of thing up if it exists.
Is the reason that single issue candidates do not do better that, while voters often decide their vote based on a single issue, they all pick different single issues? Just a thought.
Its good to have my feeling that the whole process is being made easier confirmed though.
The two main “single issues” which are being ‘swept under the carpet’ by Con/New Labour (locally) is the Iraq war and the NHS Hospital.
It’s as if there is a collective psychology of ‘political denial’ – and to say that these critical issues are not locally relevant is a nonsense. Global affects the Local (and vice-versa).
Most voters (and non-voters)are not ‘in denial’, and will therefore locally vote (or not vote) often according to global issues.
Ignore that reality at your peril.
Given the news about the postal vote debacle, I may have to revise my opinion of the council’s efficiency with elections…
I find it sad – and I feel sorry for them at Crawley Council Democratic Services. They work so hard to get it right.
I don’t like postal ballots – and I think voting should be compulsory (like Aussieland I understand), and on the day.
Blimey, India got their IT act together, and so many million voted one at the same time (pressing electronic buttons I understand). The result was as good as instant and accurate.
Why can’t we do that here ? God only knows.
Australia and India. Both in the Commonwealth. But we ourselves manage to cock it up here.
I think it’s because the people take democracy seriously in these countries – they would simply not allow it to happen – but not here.