EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

Because we haven't yet become that sort of retrograde authoritarian state.

Australia has compulsory voting. Retrograde maybe, but I don't think its an authoritarian state.

I think its a good idea

Compulsory voting plus "none of the above" option.

STV for wholly elected House of Lords, since the lords is exactly where you'd want the least objectionable/extreme candidates to end up.

Elect commons using some form of PR:

1. No more safe or swing seats, no more wasted votes, no more tactically voting Con/Lab/LD to keep the Con/Lab/LD/UKIP candidate out when you really want to vote Green/SWP/MRLP/Other.
   
2. Allows large parties which currently try to satisfy multiple significant factions to have distinct identities at election without actually losing power.
   Far-right-[Daily Heil]-Tories could split from Centre-right-[The Times]-Tories without joining UKIP. "The Labour Right" could break away and stop pretending to be left wing.
   
3. With PR and smaller parties, Cameron wouldn't have put EU Ref in his manifesto to stem the flow to UKIP whilst probably planning to abandon it in the coalition negotiations that never happened because he was too successful and Clegg failed to distance LD from the more toxic Tory policies enacted by the Con/LD coalition.
   
4. Not having big "~30% of the vote" parties would reduce the power of the media. It might only take once well-spun story to sink your preferred party's main competition; burying 4 different "10%" parties who seem likely to form a coalition is a lot harder.
   

Really?

Last time my mates went back they said you could only buy 4 drinks at once from the bar and they have a pretty strong record when it comes to dealing with immigrants they don't deem suitable.

Not saying it's Putins Russia, but I don't see them as an example to follow. Nor a society that at the moment seems to value individual autonomy.

I think its a good idea

Why?

I certainly am not suggesting that we follow Australia's immigration policy, although it looks like we are heading in that direction unfortunately.

I started to write a long reply to your question, but began to ramble. Arguments for and against here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting

For me it's simple.

I object on principle.

But if someone can show me some evidence to prove a benefit then I could be persuaded to change my mind.

^^ From teh wiki:

North Korea – Everyone over age 17 is required to vote. However, only one candidate appears on the ballot. Voting is designed to track who is and isn't in the country. Dissenting votes are possible but lead to repercussions for voters.

It really is not much lolz there.

I certainly am not suggesting that we follow Australia's immigration policy

They have much, much higher inward migration than we do - as of last year 28.5% of their population was born overseas, versus 13% for the UK.

retrograde authoritarian state

Your questions are hyperbole.

How about fines for litter dropping ?
Pissing in the street ?
General anti social behaviour ?
Not going to school ?

No vote - no say - unless you have something else to offer.

Does it help that the Austrailian population is a bit more spread out geographically ?

It's not though, is it? 90% of Australians live in urban areas, making it one of the most urbanised countries in the world.

Is there the scope to expand ?

Feels like this thread could be merged with the General Election one, for a while anyway.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-39743342/the-city-where-people-dont-vote

How about fines for litter dropping ?

Pissing in the street ?
General anti social behaviour ?
Not going to school ?

Maybe I exaggerated. But it's a real point. You can just force people to do something willy-nilly.

Those examples are prohibitions on actions, which is fundamentally different to forcing someone to do something. The default position here is you are free to do anything unless prohibited. We then choose what to prohibit based on agreed harm to society.

The exception in your list is attending school between certain ages. It's a good eg because it is an exception where, as a society, we have decided that; 1) there is a clear benefit to both society and the individual greater than the imposition on their freedom. 2) between certain ages people are not wholly responsible for their actions - hence having guardians responsible for them.

Another good eg would have been Tax or military service. Again it is a case where we think the benefit to society is more important than the individual.

I understand the principle of forcing people needs to have a tangible social benefit with no alternatives. No taxation will not work, but perhaps other ways will encourage voting.

As neither France or the Netherlands have mandatory voting yet turnouts are high. It's seen as useful and / or a duty regardless.

But here confidence in the system is low. Fptp I think doesn't help as it means smaller parties have no chance. So...why vote?

Why vote of blatant corruption often doesn't get punished?

To me those are bigger issues. But that's my 2 cents maybe the causes of low turnout are not those.

I vote but I'm well aware that my vote is pointless as it is such a safe seat. I imagine a lot of others are in the same position.

Yep. That'll be it. A great many people see no point in voting because of the limited chance of influencing the outcome with firstpastthepost.

You tend to get higher turnouts in close-fought constituencies.

As always, David Allen Green is worth a read;

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/858411210894716929

Proportional representation would probably help voter turnout (and political engagement generally).

Impeding freedoms (which is what compulsory voting would be) is just a fucking terrible idea. Would you enforce that law for those of Abrahamic faith? In some cases it's literally against their religion.

:- /

yeh.

Older people are four times as likely to vote as young people, pensioners have non-means tested benefits and have suffered the least from austerity. My assertion is that this is no coincidence, and whilst compulsory voting is clearly unpopular here it might make the government give a shit about all of society, rather than only that part which is likely to re-elect them voluntarily.

Would anyone vote for a party that wants compulsory voting ?

In what way do you feel that compulsory voting differs from jury service, or do you feel that that should be voluntary also?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-brexit-court-challenge-second-referendum-dr-andrew-watt-a7709136.html

I'll be keeping a close eye on his twitter account.

Read this thread
https://twitter.com/jeremycliffe/status/858810953353367552