Cambridge independent candidate
Graham
Further to my bugging everyone about how to stand in the election, I've
discovered it's quite straightforard. In fact you just wander down to
the Guild Hall and speak to the lovely Ruth.
So I'm writing to let you know that I have submitted my nomination to
stand as Independent candidate for the Parliamentary elections in the
Cambridge Constituency.
I've put some info about it on www.grahamwilkinson.org
My basic premise is that party politics does not work. We always end up
with some daft dictator who everyone is glad to see the back of, every
single time. Again and Again.
If you think I got something wrong or inaccurate please let me know,
also if there is anything that interests you then let me know. Currently
it's just my opinion but that's all I've got. If you tell me what you
want and vote for me, you'll have an MP that will be listening to YOU,
because simply I don't have a chief whip breathing down my neck.
Cheers people - please remember to rush out and vote for me on May 5th.
At least please don't put another big party in place. Please. I've just
about had enough of the current one, much as I did the last one. It's a
jolly good party for some but Joe Public always end up paying to clean
up the mess.
Graham Wilkinson
David Christensen
wrote:
> *From:* Graham <not.s...@yet.relief>
> *Date:* Mon, 18 Apr 2005 23:26:08 +0100
As a matter of interest, how much is the deposit and how many votes do you
need to keep it?
DC
David Norris
I think that to stand in a council election is free; for a general election
you keep your deposit if you attract 5% of the vote. Correct me if I'm
wrong.
Colin Rosenstiel
dchris...@cix.co.uk (David Christensen) wrote:
> In article <d41c5s$jko$1...@news.e7even.com>, not.s...@yet.relief
> (Graham) wrote:
>
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > Further to my bugging everyone about how to stand in the election,
> > I've discovered it's quite straightforard.
[snip]
> As a matter of interest, how much is the deposit and how many votes do
> you need to keep it?
£500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Patrick Gosling
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>Ł500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
I wonder how much of your own money you've ploughed into your
indulgence in politics, directly or indirectly, over the years?
-patrick.
Jennifer Liddle
> Ł500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
Is that 5% of the votes cast, or 5% of the electoral register?
--
Jennifer Liddle
http://www.sanger.ac.uk/~js10/
Colin Rosenstiel
(Patrick Gosling) wrote:
Maybe, to slightly greater effect, though.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Rachel
>> you need to keep it?
>
> £500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
You criticised him and made catty comments as did many other councillors
regarding how to stand and even how someone could help him read the
application form if he couldn't?
He's put his money where his mouth is - committed himself and his time and
now you are criticising him as wasting his money and implicitly time.
>
> --
> Colin Rosenstiel
>
Ashley Stevens
> Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
>
>> Ł500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
>
>
> Is that 5% of the votes cast, or 5% of the electoral register?
I think it's more probably 5% of the votes counted, excluding the ones
hidden behind the sofa by Labour. ;-)
Ashley
Jennifer Liddle
> He's put his money where his mouth is - committed himself and his time and
> now you are criticising him as wasting his money and implicitly time.
For the record, I'm impressed that he's taking the time and effort to
stand, and I have no criticism of him whatsoever. I may not vote for
him, but I think he deserves kudos for standing.
Jon Anderson
> For the record, I'm impressed that he's taking the time and effort to
> stand, and I have no criticism of him whatsoever. I may not vote for
> him, but I think he deserves kudos for standing.
Quite - he is brave if nothing else.
I think party politics is all bollocks too, and that we vote for who
will cock things up the least.
Jon
--
Durge: j...@durge.org http://users.durge.org/~jon/
OnStream: acco...@rowing.org.uk http://www.rowing.org.uk/
[ All views expressed are personal unless otherwise stated ]
Magwitch
Such as?
Jon Anderson
> Such as?
He may sound snide but Colin has been representing constituents for many
years and that's worth something. He stood, he got in, and he did the job.
Colin Rosenstiel
(Jennifer Liddle) wrote:
> Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
>
> > Ł500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
>
> Is that 5% of the votes cast, or 5% of the electoral register?
5% of the votes cast.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Mike W Miller
Jennifer Liddle wrote:
> Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
>
>
> Is that 5% of the votes cast, or 5% of the electoral register?
...and is £500 a reasonable approximation to the cost the 'state'
incurs by another person running on the ballot (extra ink, extra paper
if lots of people do it, etc.) or is there a punitive element to this
fee?
Mike
Marcus Streets
> Jennifer Liddle wrote:
>> Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
>>
>>
>> Is that 5% of the votes cast, or 5% of the electoral register?
>
> incurs by another person running on the ballot (extra ink, extra paper
> if lots of people do it, etc.) or is there a punitive element to this
> fee?
>
> Mike
>
If the candidates actually takes up the right to a freepost leaflet
this will probably cost more than Ł500 to deliver - though of course
the candidate - or their party - has to bear the cost of printing the
leaflet and getting it to the Post Office.
In council elections, where there is no right to freepost - there is
no deposit.
Marcus
Rachel
> Magwitch wrote:
>> Such as?
>
> He may sound snide but Colin
Is there a difference between sounding snide and being snide?
Jennifer Liddle
> ...and is £500 a reasonable approximation to the cost the 'state'
> incurs by another person running on the ballot (extra ink, extra paper
> if lots of people do it, etc.) or is there a punitive element to this
> fee?
I believe it was Thatcher who raised the price from £50 to £500,
probably because to discourage the Monster Raving Loony party. Perhaps
she thought they were taking too many Tory votes.
Colin Davidson
"Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.2005041...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.co.uk...
> £500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
That's the problem with party politics, an independent has less chance to
keep his deposit when faced with the electoral machines of the other
parties. It's a shame to see such a dismissive attitude from someone who is
part of one of those parties, though. May I ask, does that represent a
Cambridge Liberal Democrat position?
Jon Anderson
> Is there a difference between sounding snide and being snide?
Yes. I can't say whether he is actually snide or not. But, although he
clearly appears it to some, I think he actually has a point in that his
effort has gone to greater effect and thus it is fair comment.
Then again he could be snide and still have a point.
Whatever.
Jon Anderson
> I believe it was Thatcher who raised the price from £50 to £500,
> probably because to discourage the Monster Raving Loony party. Perhaps
> she thought they were taking too many Tory votes.
But in fact they took too many SDP votes. :-)
Marcus Streets
> Mike W Miller wrote:
>
>> incurs by another person running on the ballot (extra ink, extra paper
>> if lots of people do it, etc.) or is there a punitive element to this
>> fee?
>
>
> she thought they were taking too many Tory votes.
>
purveyor of Chesterfields - the furniture - stood as the Buy your
Chesterfield in Thame Party just to get an advert delivered as an
election address. He polled 24 votes.
There were 17 candidates at that election.
Thanks to Google and
http://www.geocities.com/by_elections/chesterfield84.html
Marcus
Paul Oldham
> In council elections, where there is no right to freepost - there is
> no deposit.
They do however cost the council money. At our level this is quite a lot
of money too compared to our budget. A parish council election costs us
about UKP400 (compared to our budget which is something like UKP80,000).
Not that we have one very often mind you.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"Sorry, but my karma just ran over your dogma"
Jennifer Liddle
> Is there a difference between sounding snide and being snide?
In this case I would suggest there is. Usenet and email are notorious
for not allowing subtle nuances to be picked up, and for 'tone' to be
misinterpreted.
Richard Meredith
Liddle) wrote:
> *From:* Jennifer Liddle <js...@sanger.ac.uk>
> *Date:* Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:43:05 +0100
>
> Mike W Miller wrote:
>
> > ...and is £500 a reasonable approximation to the cost the 'state'
> > incurs by another person running on the ballot (extra ink, extra paper
> > if lots of people do it, etc.) or is there a punitive element to this
> > fee?
>
> I believe it was Thatcher who raised the price from £50 to £500,
> probably because to discourage the Monster Raving Loony party. Perhaps
> she thought they were taking too many Tory votes.
ISTR the only thing that stopped Lord Sutch was the Grim Reaper, not some
here-today gone-tomorrow politico :-)
DesOJobber
> I think party politics is all bollocks too, and that we vote for who
> will cock things up the least.
> Jon
Or we vote for someone (e.g. Green) in order to frighten the bloke who
will inevitably win (Bliar) into doing something a little more decent
than he might otherwise have done.
DesOJ
Hedley Francis
news:f4cfj2-...@clive.the-hug.org...
> They do however cost the council money. At our level this is quite a lot
> of money too compared to our budget. A parish council election costs us
> about UKP400 (compared to our budget which is something like UKP80,000).
Count yourself lucky!
In our parish the cost of elections of £400 has to be offset against our
annual budget of £1200
So we assume an election every 4 years and budget £100 a year for elections
(8% of the parish budget)!
Hedley
Christian Mayne
> So I'm writing to let you know that I have submitted my nomination to
> stand as Independent candidate for the Parliamentary elections in the
> Cambridge Constituency.
>
> I've put some info about it on www.grahamwilkinson.org
I've given your site a cursory look over as I have a cursory interest in
politics. I was having a similar discussion about Party Politics with my
wife just yesterday, about how the whole system seems flawed to me and
generally keeps the little men with small budgets down. I think most of
what you say coincides with my view on things. So I'll stick my neck on the
line and say you've got my vote.
Patrick Gosling
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <d42bka$15k$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk>, jp...@eng.cam.ac.uk
>(Patrick Gosling) wrote:
>
>> In article <memo.2005041...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.co.uk>,
>> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>> >Ł500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
>>
>> I wonder how much of your own money you've ploughed into your
>> indulgence in politics, directly or indirectly, over the years?
>
>Maybe, to slightly greater effect, though.
Do you, then, regard the compromises of the party system as a necessity
for good government? You seem very dismissive of the notion of the
independent candidate.
-patrick.
Al Grant
> That's the problem with party politics, an independent has less
chance to
> keep his deposit when faced with the electoral machines of the other
> parties. It's a shame to see such a dismissive attitude from someone
who is
> part of one of those parties, though. May I ask, does that represent
a
> Cambridge Liberal Democrat position?
Yes. No Cambridge Lib Dem leaflet is complete without a bar chart
purporting to show that such and such a candidate "can never win".
Colin Davidson
"Al Grant" <alg...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:1113925941....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Yes. No Cambridge Lib Dem leaflet is complete without a bar chart
> purporting to show that such and such a candidate "can never win".
You mean the one based on the last two elections?
The thing that's really irritating me is that before I saw any of the LibDem
campaign literature I was planning to vote for them. Now I'm toying with
spoiling my ballot paper instead.
Sarah Cooper
chri...@remove.these.words.christian-mayne.net (Christian Mayne) wrote:
ditto, but be careful to /not/ slag off the other parties. I am more than
well aware of their failings and am more interested in a positive attitude
and what you can do rather than what they cannot (it'll be a unique
tactic I assure you). I cannot understand why political parties insist on
so much bitching - I'm /sick/ of it. Good on you for sticking your head
above the parapet.
SCoop
Colin Rosenstiel
> Mike W Miller wrote:
>
> > ...and is £500 a reasonable approximation to the cost the 'state'
> > incurs by another person running on the ballot (extra ink, extra paper
> > if lots of people do it, etc.) or is there a punitive element to this
> > fee?
>
> I believe it was Thatcher who raised the price from £50 to £500,
> probably because to discourage the Monster Raving Loony party. Perhaps
> she thought they were taking too many Tory votes.
It went up from £150 to £500 in 1983, an increase well below the historic
inflation at the time since the £150 level was set. At the same time the
percentage required to save a deposit was reduced from 12.5% to 5%. This
means that the major parties now lose very few deposits.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
explo...@yahoo.co.uk (DesOJobber) wrote:
In Cambridge you have a real choice between Blair's candidate and the
Liberal Democrat if you want to achieve that.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
(Colin Davidson) wrote:
So you want Labour to win again?
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
(Patrick Gosling) wrote:
> In article <memo.2005041...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.co.uk>,
> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
> >In article <d42bka$15k$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk>, jp...@eng.cam.ac.uk
> >(Patrick Gosling) wrote:
> >
> >> In article <memo.2005041...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.co.uk>,
> >> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >£500 and 5%. Graham must have money to burn.
> >>
> >> I wonder how much of your own money you've ploughed into your
> >> indulgence in politics, directly or indirectly, over the years?
> >
> >Maybe, to slightly greater effect, though.
>
> Do you, then, regard the compromises of the party system as a necessity
> for good government? You seem very dismissive of the notion of the
> independent candidate.
Very clearly so, based on real experience over more than 30 years.
Unlike any other current City Councillor I have helped get an Independent
City Councillor elected (in 1978), in my own ward. I've also been in much
the same position as an Independent, when I was one of just two Liberal
Councillors.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Andrew Bower
> Yes. No Cambridge Lib Dem leaflet is complete without a bar chart
> purporting to show that such and such a candidate "can never win".
As a Conservative supporter in Rotherhithe in 2001 I remember being
irritated by Simon Hughes' literature specifically saying that Tories
should vote Liberal Democrat to keep Labour out. This made me even more
determined to vote for the losing candidate.
To rub salt into the wound my Saturday slumber was later disturbed by Mr
Hughes' loud victory parade with his canary taxi.
Mary Pegg
> This made me even more determined to vote for the losing candidate.
What on Earth is the point of that?
Mark Carroll
Perhaps: to help give them more chance of at least some press coverage,
and to encourage them to try again next time.
-- Mark
Mary Pegg
I quite understand what you might call "secondary" political aims with
respect to voting for a minority party, but the Tories do not qualify -
yet.
--
Happy, sad, cross and concentrating.
Andrew Bower
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I didn't mean that voting for the losing
candidate was my aim. I was supporting that candidate and despite the
fact that he was likely to lose I was all the more determined to vote for
him as a result of the Lib Dem literature urging me not to.
Andrew
Bawson
news:d41c5s$jko$1...@news.e7even.com...
> Hi Folks,
>
> Further to my bugging everyone about how to stand in the election, I've
> discovered it's quite straightforard. In fact you just wander down to
> the Guild Hall and speak to the lovely Ruth.
>
> So I'm writing to let you know that I have submitted my nomination to
> stand as Independent candidate for the Parliamentary elections in the
> Cambridge Constituency.
Good luck!
Tim Ward
news:d42bka$15k$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
>
> I wonder how much of your own money you've ploughed into your
> indulgence in politics, directly or indirectly, over the years?
Excellent point. Costs rather more than that just to take a week off work to
fight an election. Why do we do it, I wonder.
--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Ltd - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor
Tim Ward
news:Pine.LNX.4.60.05...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk...
> You criticised him and made catty comments as did many other councillors
> regarding how to stand and even how someone could help him read the
> application form if he couldn't?
I'm not criticising. I'd maybe have personally preferred him not to stand
(because his platform at a very quick initial glance looks exceedingly
similar to ours, give or take the Euro) but of course I defend his right to
do so.
Tim Ward
news:d42lnc$fnc$1...@heisenberg.grid-zero.net...
>
> I think party politics is all bollocks too, and that we vote for who
> will cock things up the least.
At the David Wheeler[1] memorial event yesterday one of the anecdotes was an
explanation of his voting system: punters are allowed to put *either* one +
by a candidate they want to vote for *or* one - by a candidate they want to
vote against. Obviously you add up the +s and subtract the -s.
[1] Guy who invented the subroutine. Amongst many many other things.
Tim Ward
news:d43a9h$afk$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
>
> "Al Grant" <alg...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
> news:1113925941....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Yes. No Cambridge Lib Dem leaflet is complete without a bar chart
> > purporting to show that such and such a candidate "can never win".
>
> You mean the one based on the last two elections?
No, the one based on the last four elections (I'm not sure why Kevin didn't
start at 2000 rather than 2001 as the Tories came third in that one too -
and possibly earlier ones, before my time).
Rachel
Or perhaps because you want someone to win because you think their
policies are ropey and that in the next term they'll discredit themselves
making it much harder to return to power in the long term - a lot of
people seem keen to see labour back because they want them to deal with
the longer term effects of policies implemented this term
Rachel
> "Patrick Gosling" <jp...@eng.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:d42bka$15k$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
>>
>> I wonder how much of your own money you've ploughed into your
>> indulgence in politics, directly or indirectly, over the years?
>
> Excellent point. Costs rather more than that just to take a week off work to
> fight an election. Why do we do it, I wonder.
Ego?
Masochism?
A desperate need for approval?
Power crazed?
explo...@yahoo.co.uk
> > The thing that's really irritating me is that before I saw any of
the
> > LibDem campaign literature I was planning to vote for them. Now I'm
> > toying with spoiling my ballot paper instead.
>
> So you want Labour to win again?
>
> --
> Colin Rosenstiel
Your 2nd instance of negative campaigning within a single thread and 30
minutes. Not too inspiring.
DesOJ
Colin Rosenstiel
Ward) wrote:
> No, the one based on the last four elections (I'm not sure why Kevin
> didn't start at 2000 rather than 2001 as the Tories came third in that
> one too - and possibly earlier ones, before my time).
A lot longer than that. It's all at www.cambridgeelections.org.uk,
especially the Party Totals link. The Tories last got at least second
place across the city in 1992. The first election they came third in was
even earlier, 1985.
Although the numbers on the web site relate to the city as a whole, it is
fairly easy to deduct the figures for Queen Edith's and Trumpington wards
and ascertain that the Tories were third in the Cambridge constituency in
all those years too.
They were also third within the present constituency in 1982 but the
present constituency boundaries were only adopted in 1983 so maybe that
shouldn't count.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
Ward) wrote:
> "Patrick Gosling" <jp...@eng.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:d42bka$15k$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
> >
> > I wonder how much of your own money you've ploughed into your
> > indulgence in politics, directly or indirectly, over the years?
>
> Excellent point. Costs rather more than that just to take a week off
> work to fight an election. Why do we do it, I wonder.
Hardly for the adulation we get here! :-)
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
explo...@yahoo.co.uk () wrote:
> Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
> > In article <d43a9h$afk$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk>,
> ca...@biotech.cam.ac.uk
>
> > > The thing that's really irritating me is that before I saw any of
> > > the LibDem campaign literature I was planning to vote for them. Now
> > > I'm toying with spoiling my ballot paper instead.
> >
> > So you want Labour to win again?
>
> Your 2nd instance of negative campaigning within a single thread and 30
> minutes. Not too inspiring.
That *is* the choice in Cambridge (unlike most of the seats in this
region), though.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Paul Oldham
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Tim Ward wrote:
>
>>"Patrick Gosling" <jp...@eng.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
>>news:d42bka$15k$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
>>
>>>I wonder how much of your own money you've ploughed into your
>>>indulgence in politics, directly or indirectly, over the years?
>>
>>Excellent point. Costs rather more than that just to take a week off work to
>>fight an election. Why do we do it, I wonder.
>
> Ego?
> Masochism?
> A desperate need for approval?
> Power crazed?
It's just attention seeking, best to ignore them ;-)
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!"
Linda Fox
wrote:
>[1] Guy who invented the subroutine. Amongst many many other things.
All that and table-football too? I'm impressed.
Linda ff
Rachel
But would a libdem council and MP be good combination - take the bin issue
at least anne campbell's opposition caused some debate and made the
council pull their game up. with the Marshall's building on issue coming
up - would a lib dem MP offer the same opposition and debate or would such
issues go through unquestioned? Would it be good for the councillors to be
less scrutinised?
Al Grant
> That *is* the choice in Cambridge (unlike most of the seats in this
> region), though.
Depending on your philosophical position there's either a choice
of six, or no choice at all. There's only a choice of two in the
event that everyone else's votes produce a tie.
Colin Rosenstiel
rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk (Rachel) wrote:
There's always the MP for South Cambridgeshire if it's bugging you that
much.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
A Plagued Lighthouse Keeper
> Rachel wrote:
>
>> Is there a difference between sounding snide and being snide?
>
>
> Yes. I can't say whether he is actually snide or not. But, although he
> clearly appears it to some, I think he actually has a point in that his
> effort has gone to greater effect and thus it is fair comment.
> Then again he could be snide and still have a point.
> Whatever.
Huh? And what would have been said when Colin *first* stood?
Independents rarely get in, but he might get my vote anyway simply
because I'm so opposed to the party system (and anyone who tells me I'd
be wasting my vote can sod off).
Alan Braggins
>rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk (Rachel) wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
>
>> > That *is* the choice in Cambridge (unlike most of the seats in this
>> > region), though
>>
>> But would a libdem council and MP be good combination - take the bin
>> issue at least anne campbell's opposition caused some debate and made
>> the council pull their game up. with the Marshall's building on issue
>> coming up - would a lib dem MP offer the same opposition and debate or
>> would such issues go through unquestioned? Would it be good for the
>> councillors to be less scrutinised?
>
>There's always the MP for South Cambridgeshire if it's bugging you that
>much.
I thought protocol required them to write back to non-South Cambridgeshire
people saying "you should take this up with your own MP" (unless it was
on a subject they had ministerial responsibility, possibly)?
(Marshalls might be relevent to South Cambridgeshire, but bin collection
inside the city won't be.)
A Plagued Lighthouse Keeper
<cynic>
Yes of course. Bad though they are, the alternatives are worse. I
*really* do not want to see another Tory government. And dream on if you
think the Lib Dems are capable of forming a government.
The issue is simply how we keep Labour in power but smack them at the
same time.
And from the City's point of view I would have thought we'd be better
off with an MP of the ruling party who could (hah!) act on the City's
behalf unlike an opposition MP.
</cynic>
Rachel
>>
>> But would a libdem council and MP be good combination - take the bin
>> issue at least anne campbell's opposition caused some debate and made
>> the council pull their game up. with the Marshall's building on issue
>> coming up - would a lib dem MP offer the same opposition and debate or
>> would such issues go through unquestioned? Would it be good for the
>> councillors to be less scrutinised?
>
> There's always the MP for South Cambridgeshire if it's bugging you that
> much.
> --
> Colin Rosenstiel
It's quite a nice little status quo at the moment - almost PR with the
city and influence - probably the proportional influences reflect voting
split quite well,
City Council: Lib
City MP: Lab
S Cambs MP: Tory
I can see huge advantages in accountability and diluting 'radical'
policies to have local councils a different party from the MP and
government. Which probably goes back to the lack of independent candidates
etc..
Mary Pegg
> Yes of course. Bad though they are, the alternatives are worse. I
> *really* do not want to see another Tory government. And dream on if you
> think the Lib Dems are capable of forming a government.
>
> The issue is simply how we keep Labour in power but smack them at the
> same time.
So, you would like to reduce but not remove their majority?
Stop me now, if you think my conclusion will be obvious...
--
Semper in faecibus sumus, sole profunditas quae variat.
John Penton
> In article <718b9bd2.0504...@posting.google.com>,
> explo...@yahoo.co.uk (DesOJobber) wrote:
>
>> Jon Anderson <j...@durge.org> wrote in message
>>> news:<d42lnc$fnc$1...@heisenberg.grid-zero.net>...
>>
>>> I think party politics is all bollocks too, and that we vote for who
>>> will cock things up the least.
>>
>> Or we vote for someone (e.g. Green) in order to frighten the bloke
>> who will inevitably win (Bliar) into doing something a little more
>> decent than he might otherwise have done.
>
> In Cambridge you have a real choice between Blair's candidate and the
> Liberal Democrat if you want to achieve that.
I hate this argument "only x and y have a chance of winning so vote x" - it
is firstly not true (though satistically it is fairly reasonable) and
secondly it is a complete non-argument. The best analogy I can think of is
"when walking across this boggy field, you are most likely to step in a
puddle or some mud, so don't even bother trying to walk on the grass".
Most amusing is the fact that both the LDs and the Cons are currently
claiming (in Cambridge City) that only they have a chance of beating Labour.
John
--
John Penton, posting as an individual unless specifically indicated
otherwise.
John Penton
> In article <1113950422....@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> explo...@yahoo.co.uk () wrote:
>
>> Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
>>> In article <d43a9h$afk$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk>,
>>> ca...@biotech.cam.ac.uk
>>
>>>> The thing that's really irritating me is that before I saw any of
>>>> the LibDem campaign literature I was planning to vote for them. Now
>>>> I'm toying with spoiling my ballot paper instead.
>>>
>>> So you want Labour to win again?
>>
>> Your 2nd instance of negative campaigning within a single thread and
>> 30 minutes. Not too inspiring.
>
> That *is* the choice in Cambridge (unlike most of the seats in this
> region), though.
What rubbish.
If I used that argument, I could simply say that Labour have won the last n
elections, so only they can win this one, so I might as well vote for them.
The whole point of an election is to allow things to change. The only
reason that things don't change is that the political parties go around
telling everybody that they aren't going to.
Sion Arrowsmith
>It's quite a nice little status quo at the moment - almost PR with the
>city and influence - probably the proportional influences reflect voting
>split quite well,
>
>City Council: Lib
>City MP: Lab
>S Cambs MP: Tory
Plus a Conservative County Council. Not that I trust them (or the
MPs) not to frustrate the City Council purely for the sake of
political points-scoring.
--
\S -- si...@chiark.greenend.org.uk -- http://www.chaos.org.uk/~sion/
___ | "Frankly I have no feelings towards penguins one way or the other"
\X/ | -- Arthur C. Clarke
her nu becomeþ se bera eadward ofdun hlæddre heafdes bæce bump bump bump
Paul Oldham
> Rachel <rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>>It's quite a nice little status quo at the moment - almost PR with the
>>city and influence - probably the proportional influences reflect voting
>>split quite well,
>>
>>City Council: Lib
>>City MP: Lab
>>S Cambs MP: Tory
>
> Plus a Conservative County Council. Not that I trust them (or the
> MPs) not to frustrate the City Council purely for the sake of
> political points-scoring.
Outside the city we've got Tories at the County slagging off other
Tories at SCDC, both at Area Joint Committee meetings and in election
leaflets so the point scoring isn't just cross party. The whole thing is
far too much like school gangs for me. :-(
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"A man's home is his castle, in a manor of speaking"
Liz Baker
"Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.2005042...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.co.uk...
> Hardly for the adulation we get here! :-)
>
It'll be for the gratitude and respect of people like me, and also my
partner, who knows your name even though he's never met you or had the
chance to vote for you.
For background (especially for Colin who probably doesn't remember), I
posted here how the city council tax department wouldn't give us the student
discount on our council tax because I was only a licensee and not a tenant
in our flat but wouldn't give my partner the single person discount either.
Colin followed up my post, contacted the council tax department and got us a
rebate of nearly £400 at a time when we were especially grateful for it. The
sort of councillor who takes up a case and gets through the seemingly
impenetrable layers of governement on behalf of those less knowledgeable and
less able is worth their weight in gold. Voters in the city would be wise to
hang on to them..
How many people are there who you've helped like that, Colin? Dozens?
Hundreds?
Liz
Liz Baker
"Hedley Francis" <hfra...@whereiwork.com> wrote in message
news:d432lr$7r7$1...@cam-news1.cambridge.arm.com...
> In our parish the cost of elections of £400 has to be offset against our
> annual budget of £1200
>
> So we assume an election every 4 years and budget £100 a year for
elections
> (8% of the parish budget)!
If your total income is that small, would your election costs necessarily be
that high? It depends on how you set your precept but if yours is anything
like ours that would mean you only have a parish of 50 homes. Or are you
talking income left over after you've budgeted for other things?
Liz
Paul Oldham
> "Hedley Francis" <hfra...@whereiwork.com> wrote in message
> news:d432lr$7r7$1...@cam-news1.cambridge.arm.com...
>
>>In our parish the cost of elections of £400 has to be offset against our
>>annual budget of £1200
>>
>>So we assume an election every 4 years and budget £100 a year for
>> elections
>
>>(8% of the parish budget)!
>
> If your total income is that small, would your election costs necessarily be
> that high? It depends on how you set your precept but if yours is anything
> like ours that would mean you only have a parish of 50 homes.
Are election costs calculated by the district council on a per head
basis? The true cost is going to be largely down to the number of
stations and number of officers rather than the number of electors.
Having said that we do have four officers at our station whereas a small
parish (like the one Jim worked at last year) would only need two I
would expect it to be cheaper.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late"
A Plagued Lighthouse Keeper
> A Plagued Lighthouse Keeper wrote:
>
>
>>Yes of course. Bad though they are, the alternatives are worse. I
>>*really* do not want to see another Tory government. And dream on if you
>>think the Lib Dems are capable of forming a government.
>>
>>The issue is simply how we keep Labour in power but smack them at the
>>same time.
>
>
> So, you would like to reduce but not remove their majority?
>
> Stop me now, if you think my conclusion will be obvious...
Yep - ain't arguing with you there. That's why I am so opposed to FPTP.
Colin Rosenstiel
Oldham) wrote:
> On 20/04/05 14:47 Sion Arrowsmith wrote:
> > Rachel <rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>It's quite a nice little status quo at the moment - almost PR with
> >>the city and influence - probably the proportional influences reflect
> >>voting split quite well,
> >>
> >>City Council: Lib
> >>City MP: Lab
> >>S Cambs MP: Tory
> >
> > Plus a Conservative County Council. Not that I trust them (or the
> > MPs) not to frustrate the City Council purely for the sake of
> > political points-scoring.
>
> Outside the city we've got Tories at the County slagging off other
> Tories at SCDC, both at Area Joint Committee meetings and in election
> leaflets so the point scoring isn't just cross party. The whole thing
> is far too much like school gangs for me. :-(
I can't speak of the South Cambs DC area but I think relations between the
City and County are much improved since 2000.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
(John Penton) wrote:
> Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
> > In article <718b9bd2.0504...@posting.google.com>,
> > explo...@yahoo.co.uk (DesOJobber) wrote:
> >
> >> Jon Anderson <j...@durge.org> wrote in message
> >>> news:<d42lnc$fnc$1...@heisenberg.grid-zero.net>...
> >>
> >>> I think party politics is all bollocks too, and that we vote for who
> >>> will cock things up the least.
> >>
> >> Or we vote for someone (e.g. Green) in order to frighten the bloke
> >> who will inevitably win (Bliar) into doing something a little more
> >> decent than he might otherwise have done.
> >
> > In Cambridge you have a real choice between Blair's candidate and the
> > Liberal Democrat if you want to achieve that.
>
> I hate this argument "only x and y have a chance of winning so vote x"
> - it is firstly not true (though satistically it is fairly reasonable)
> and secondly it is a complete non-argument. The best analogy I can
> think of is "when walking across this boggy field, you are most likely
> to step in a puddle or some mud, so don't even bother trying to walk on
> the grass".
>
> Most amusing is the fact that both the LDs and the Cons are currently
> claiming (in Cambridge City) that only they have a chance of beating
> Labour.
Are the Tories actually claiming anything about the General Election in
Cambridge City? All I've seen is a Council Council leaflet in Petersfield
(normal Tory position 4th).
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
> >>> region), though
> >>
> >> But would a libdem council and MP be good combination - take the bin
> >> issue at least anne campbell's opposition caused some debate and made
> >> the council pull their game up. with the Marshall's building on issue
> >> coming up - would a lib dem MP offer the same opposition and debate
> >> or would such issues go through unquestioned? Would it be good for
> >> the councillors to be less scrutinised?
> >
> > There's always the MP for South Cambridgeshire if it's bugging you
> > that much.
>
> It's quite a nice little status quo at the moment - almost PR with the
> city and influence - probably the proportional influences reflect
> voting split quite well,
>
> City Council: Lib
> City MP: Lab
> S Cambs MP: Tory
>
> I can see huge advantages in accountability and diluting 'radical'
> policies to have local councils a different party from the MP and
> government. Which probably goes back to the lack of independent
> candidates etc..
You and Alan are both missing the point that the City has two MPs, all of
the Cambridge constituency and part of the South Cambs constituency.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
Baker) wrote:
:-)) You're too kind!
> How many people are there who you've helped like that, Colin? Dozens?
> Hundreds?
I don't know to be honest. It's sometimes hard to know if it was my asking
that got something moving or not. It is sometimes insanely satisfying when
someone does thank a councillor for a job done. Often it seems people
only want to complain.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Liz Baker
"Paul Oldham" <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote in message
news:5c7ij2-...@clive.the-hug.org...
On 20/04/05 15:36 Liz Baker wrote:
> Are election costs calculated by the district council on a per head
> basis? The true cost is going to be largely down to the number of
> stations and number of officers rather than the number of electors.
>
> Having said that we do have four officers at our station whereas a small
> parish (like the one Jim worked at last year) would only need two I
> would expect it to be cheaper.
I wouldn't expect it to be on a per-head basis, but I wouldn't expect there
to be a standard cost per election.
Liz
Hedley Francis
"Liz Baker" <e.ba...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:3cn7h1F...@individual.net...
Yup, you're fairly close with 50 homes! (about 70 I think). And yes that is
total precept for last year (it has been increased this year).
I think (and don't quote me on this) that the cost may be due to the fact
that we don't have a village hall, and so have to hire a caravan for any and
all elections.
I'd have to check my facts on the exact cost though, but I think I'm about
right.
Hedley
Patrick Gosling
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>I don't know to be honest. It's sometimes hard to know if it was my asking
>that got something moving or not. It is sometimes insanely satisfying when
>someone does thank a councillor for a job done. Often it seems people
>only want to complain.
I wouldn't regard your admirable efforts on behalf of constituents as
a good reason for not pointing out when I think you've said something
crap.
Would you rather only get positive feedback?
-patrick.
Gropius Riftwynde
Rosenstiel) wrote:
>I don't know to be honest. It's sometimes hard to know if it was my asking
>that got something moving or not. It is sometimes insanely satisfying when
>someone does thank a councillor for a job done. Often it seems people
>only want to complain.
Well, I get the impression that Colin does things far beyond the call
of duty, and he does so because of his political beliefs, for people
who are not necessarily of his party. And he is apparently sane.
That's good enough for me. Of course, he did reputedly invent the
square roundabouts in Grange Road that got into Private Eye, but
whatever the truth of that, he made them round again.
GR
Colin Rosenstiel
(Patrick Gosling) wrote:
No, but you haven't heard the general grumpiness that can sometimes make
cam.misc sound like a love-in.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Paul Oldham
I suppose it might be per head - SCDC might have decided that it was a
fairer way to proceed given that parish council income is (essentially)
per head. Although from what Hedley said it looks like it may be a
standard cost regardless of size of parish :-(
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"Never miss a good chance to shut up"
Tim Ward
news:Pine.LNX.4.60.05...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk...
>
> But would a libdem council and MP be good combination - take the bin issue
> at least anne campbell's opposition caused some debate and made the
> council pull their game up.
I'm really not sure what you're referring to here. As vice chair of
environment I ought to know if we'd changed anything to do with bins because
of Anne Campbell, and I am aware of no such change. I *am* aware that she
circulated an ill-informed leaflet which appeared to make it clear that she
didn't understand the issues.
--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Ltd - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor
Tim Ward
news:memo.2005042...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.co.uk...
>
> City and County are much improved since 2000.
Going rather further back, well before my time, don't I recall the two
councils spending a considerable amount of our money suing each other?? -
whilst we may grumble about the county from time to time things are
certainly not that bad now!
Rachel
> "Rachel" <rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.60.05...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk...
>>
>> But would a libdem council and MP be good combination - take the bin issue
>> at least anne campbell's opposition caused some debate and made the
>> council pull their game up.
>
> I'm really not sure what you're referring to here. As vice chair of
> environment I ought to know if we'd changed anything to do with bins because
> of Anne Campbell, and I am aware of no such change. I *am* aware that she
> circulated an ill-informed leaflet which appeared to make it clear that she
> didn't understand the issues.
I agree and I disagreed with her policy on the issue, however it did stoke
up debate she had a little wobbly in the CEN, those unhappy got the chance
to complain via her form, regardless of changing anything - even
ill-thought out opposition often helps form better
policy, having some opposition means more care is taken into explaining
the policy, making it clear and disbarring the myths, means people
feel they have somewhere to register disapproval .... She didn't
actually change anything but raising the profile of a policy so people
take interest isn't a bad thing... pointing out the flaws in her arguments
seems to keep the councillors on their toes and I don't think that's a bad
thing... there's a fair old amount of blue surrounding Cambridge already
, the council is yellow so if Anne and her cheshire grin goes I guess that
will leave the red ones disenfranchised? With only yellow and blue in the
paint box you can't paint orange and purple swirls!
Tim Ward
> up debate she had a little wobbly in the CEN, those unhappy got the chance
> to complain via her form, regardless of changing anything - even
> ill-thought out opposition often helps form better
> policy, having some opposition means more care is taken into explaining
> the policy, making it clear and disbarring the myths,
Oh yes, see what you mean, that's fair enough, we did perhaps put more
effort into explaining things than might otherwise have been the case just
right then.
Rachel
> "Rachel" <rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.60.05...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk...
>>
>> I agree and I disagreed with her policy on the issue, however it did stoke
>> up debate she had a little wobbly in the CEN, those unhappy got the chance
>> to complain via her form, regardless of changing anything - even
>> ill-thought out opposition often helps form better
>> policy, having some opposition means more care is taken into explaining
>> the policy, making it clear and disbarring the myths,
>
> Oh yes, see what you mean, that's fair enough, we did perhaps put more
> effort into explaining things than might otherwise have been the case just
> right then.
>
Ambiguous dyslexic effects setting in... sorry; must try harder to be
comprehensible.
I meant "I agree" as with you on points Re: Anne
I meant "I disagreed" as in I disagreed with her - I thought her rant on
bins was rubbis
Likewise I think Anne trying to block developing Marshall's would force
much better debate on development needs and generate a better development
as a result, i.e. only a well thought out plan would get through
Tim Ward
> much better debate on development needs and generate a better development
> as a result, i.e. only a well thought out plan would get through
I can assure you that lots of people are putting constructive input into
this planning process.
Just one little example (I'm not involved in most of the process): The most
recent draft included a statement that the district centre would be a
"linear high street", due apparently to some unimaginative thinking about
how people would be able access all of it by bus. I went into the last
environment committee intending to question that bit, but someone else
mentioned it first! - we removed that constraint.
Chris Lamb
> "Rachel" <rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.60.05...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk...
>>
>> Likewise I think Anne trying to block developing Marshall's would force
>> much better debate on development needs and generate a better development
>> as a result, i.e. only a well thought out plan would get through
>
> I can assure you that lots of people are putting constructive input into
> this planning process.
>
> Just one little example (I'm not involved in most of the process): The most
> recent draft included a statement that the district centre would be a
> "linear high street", due apparently to some unimaginative thinking about
> how people would be able access all of it by bus. I went into the last
> environment committee intending to question that bit, but someone else
> mentioned it first! - we removed that constraint.
Well, I'd hope it is linear. The prospect of a nonlinear
street fills me with trepidation. How would one give
directions to the newsagent - "well, you go right along there,
turn left at the discontinuity, stand on that spot for ten
minutes and the newsagents should arrive presently."
Chris
Theo Markettos
> "Rachel" <rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.60.05...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk...
>>
>> Likewise I think Anne trying to block developing Marshall's would force
>> much better debate on development needs and generate a better development
>> as a result, i.e. only a well thought out plan would get through
>
> recent draft included a statement that the district centre would be a
> "linear high street"
Marshalls already has a nice, wide linear high street. Just put houses down
the 'green fields' each side and leave the streetlamps where they are.
Perhaps commuting by 747 will be quicker than by MGB...
Theo
Patrick Gosling
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>> Would you rather only get positive feedback?
>
>No, but you haven't heard the general grumpiness that can sometimes make
>cam.misc sound like a love-in.
Eek!
8-)
-patrick.
Tim Ward
news:Yyo*yb...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
Oh, we did discuss preserving part of the runway, in particular the bit with
the numbers painted on, but nobody took me seriously.
Theo Markettos
> "Rachel" <rhb21-b...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.60.05...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk...
>>
>> Likewise I think Anne trying to block developing Marshall's would force
>> much better debate on development needs and generate a better development
>> as a result, i.e. only a well thought out plan would get through
>
> recent draft included a statement that the district centre would be a
> "linear high street"
Marshalls already has a nice, wide linear high street. Just put houses down
the 'green fields' each side and leave the 'streetlamps' where they are.
Perhaps commuting by 747 will be quicker than by MGB...
Theo
Gropius Riftwynde
wrote:
>Oh, we did discuss preserving part of the runway, in particular the bit with
>the numbers painted on, but nobody took me seriously.
Could be confusing to dozy pilots. Sometimes aircraft would try to
land at Blackheath, mistaking it for Heathrow, and there used to be a
barn on the approach with the large letters NO painted on the roof.
GR
Paul Oldham
> Oh, we did discuss preserving part of the runway, in particular the bit with
> the numbers painted on, but nobody took me seriously.
Philistines.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"I put instant coffee in a microwave, and almost went back in time."
Colin Davidson
"Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.2005042...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.co.uk...
>
> That *is* the choice in Cambridge (unlike most of the seats in this
> region), though.
No it isn't. You've come second once or twice in elections here, you're not
consistently second. Despite what your silly election flier said.
Colin Davidson
> So you want Labour to win again?
In a City Council election, I'd choose to vote Labour in a heartbeat. In the
general election, having had a good look at our Liberal candidate and having
read the relevant literature put forward by the major parties, I see little
advantage in voting Liberal. You've just convinced me even further of that;
after that comment, I wish I lived in your ward so I could vote against you.
Can you not, just for a minute, quit the negative campaigning?
I may spoil my ballot paper because NONE of the candidates are credible; I
don't want an MP who is a member of Frieds of the Earth (the liberal one), I
can't vote for someone who broke her promise on university fees (the Labour
one) and I have nothing remotely positive to say about the Tories. That
leaves 'Respect', who I don't, UKIP, who are I think a joke party, and an
independent, with whom I don't agree on too many things (having looked at
his site).
That the Liberal candidate is not Anne Campbell... Is that it? Is that the
best you can come up with? That Labour might get in again if I don't vote
for the Liberals? That's utterly pathetic.
Colin Davidson
(cut)
> A lot longer than that. It's all at www.cambridgeelections.org.uk,
> especially the Party Totals link. The Tories last got at least second
> place across the city in 1992. The first election they came third in was
> even earlier, 1985.
(cut)
So when asked to vote for their MP, the Liberal party have beaten the Tories
in to third place in the last two elections. In the relevant elections
looked at, the Liberals don't always come second, they merely have the last
twice.
Tim Ward
news:d48c2n$jg9$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
>
> That
> leaves 'Respect', who I don't, UKIP, who are I think a joke party, and an
> independent, with whom I don't agree on too many things (having looked at
> his site).
According to the CEN there are two independents now. Anything to slow the
count down and keep us up longer!
Andrew Walkingshaw
> "Colin Davidson" <ca...@biotech.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:d48c2n$jg9$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
>>
>> That
>> leaves 'Respect', who I don't, UKIP, who are I think a joke party, and an
>> independent, with whom I don't agree on too many things (having looked at
>> his site).
>
> According to the CEN there are two independents now. Anything to slow the
> count down and keep us up longer!
Oh dear. About what time would you expect to declare?
- Andrew (co-fronting the CUR1350 election coverage, and therefore likely to
be on air six hours solid.)
Tim Ward
news:slrnd6gad6.1hc...@hestia.jcn.srcf.net...
> In article <3cqk1gF...@individual.net>, Tim Ward wrote:
> > "Colin Davidson" <ca...@biotech.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > news:d48c2n$jg9$1...@gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
> >>
> >> That
> >> leaves 'Respect', who I don't, UKIP, who are I think a joke party, and
an
> >> independent, with whom I don't agree on too many things (having looked
at
> >> his site).
> >
> > According to the CEN there are two independents now. Anything to slow
the
> > count down and keep us up longer!
>
> Oh dear. About what time would you expect to declare?
Colin's guess would be better than mine. But with eight or nine candidates
it'll take longer than three; and of course the county council ballot papers
also have to be separated and validated. (The county council count will be
during sensible hours on the Friday.)
(Personally I don't expect or intend to be invited to the general election
count - younger people who are still awake and alert and able to do useful
work at 03:00 having been up since 05:00 the previous day are preferred - I
expect I'll be drinking somewhere.)
Duncan Wood
Surely the largest effect on the count time is how many people vote, why
do extra candidates increase how long it takes?