Ballot Paper - None of the Above (NOTA)

[throwaway4372]

We've had conversations previously about voting, with people saying they'd like a "none of the above" option. Without this option you either don't vote at all (in which case nobody knows what you think) or you spoil the ballot paper (which makes you look incompetent). I think there's a lot of people who would want to make use of this option in the upcoming election, and if we're going to get the option included we have to make a fuss about it now.

I was planning on making a petition, but someone beat me to it, so sign it if you agree:

Archived Petition: Implement "None of the above" on ballots in all United Kingdom elections #NOTAUK

I urge the UK Government to permanently adopt "None of the above" on all ballots starting with the next general election, to enhance democratic choice and allow voters to express dissatisfaction. If NOTA wins most votes, consider rerunning the election, possibly with initial candidates disqualified.

petition.parliament.uk

I searched the forum for this topic, there was no a dedicated thread for it, it was mentioned within in other election threads (avoiding necro). So let this thread be a discussion about the topic which can continue past the next general election and for as long as is necessary.

None of the above - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[throwaway4372]

Spoiling the paper is what this is for already isn't it, why does it translate to 'this person is incompetent'?

because you can't tell if they:
- spoilt it deliberately
- got confused
- marked it in some invalid way which couldn't be interpreted
- thought it was funny to draw a penis
it all ends up in the same stat.

 

[throwaway4372]

who would actually be left to vote for?

I've previously suggested a party with one policy: "to change to PR then immediately hold a GE". I think this party would do well.
It also happens to be a good option to break the deadlock in the scenario you described.
So potentially it's a way of getting PR (via NOTA), knowing that Cons/Lab will never give us PR otherwise.

 

[throwaway4372]

What would it achieve though? Ok, it gives people the option to say that none of the options are good enough (for them), but it doesn’t actually solve anything?

Mainly - better stats. You get to see who voted nota, instead of them being counted as spoils, or no vote at all, or reluctant votes for someone.

If for whatever reason a result doesn't occur, then it's back to the drawing board. Produce policies people actually want and candidates people can trust.

E.g. in the US election, people don't want Trump (nutter) or Biden (too old), the parties could easily field other candidates to produce a result, e.g. Haley vs Buttigieg.

 

[throwaway4372]

DP it's not just about you. Other people see the value in it. Letting people have the nota option doesn't take anything away from you. You can still vote, or not vote, if that's how you want to express your will.
p.s. I have you ignored btw

 

[throwaway4372]

Maybe, but will there be enough of those 'other people' for the petition to hit 10k (at which point the gov will say 'No'), never mind 100k (at which point the gov will say 'Nooooooo')? I have my doubts.

No idea, one way to find out.
Note that we're talking about people who bother to engage with epetitions (the website doesn't exactly make things easy to discover), which is of course smaller than people who would use the nota option if it were available.

 

[throwaway4372]

The seat needs to be filled. "no taxation without representation"
It isn't necessary to disqualify candidates, parties can make a judgement on whether the candidate has a chance of winning.
The rules about getting deposits back don't need to change.