CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh

CEC election 2017 (May 4th)

(1269 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. crowriver
    Member

    As I posted upthread (from EEN story):

    "A Lib Dem insider said they had made clear they were not willing to go into partnership with any party whose first priority was independence, but the idea of taking part in a pro-Union coalition had not been ruled out at national level. The insider pointed out Lib Dems had been in coalition in the Capital before and so were “not afraid of power” but were also “happy to sit it out”. "

    So, in summary:

    Labour willing to go into coalition with SNP. Unwilling to do same with Tories. (Have since hedged their bets).

    Greens willing to do confidence and supply deal with SNP.

    Tories want a Unionist coalition, excluding SNP and Greens.

    Lib Dems unwilling to partner with SNP.

    So, SNP-Labour minority coalition with Green support on key issues? (Or Labour's 'rainbow coalition idea, which seems unlikely). Or (shudder) the Tories' Unionist coalition?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  2. Stickman
    Member

    Visualisation of how the voting process worked in each ward:

    http://council17.mulvenna.org/results/?year=2017&council=city-of-edinburgh&ward=S13002919

    Posted 7 years ago #
  3. Klaxon
    Member

    This is possibly the best way I have ever seen STV shown off

    Posted 7 years ago #
  4. chdot
    Admin

    "

    TALKS between the SNP and Labour on forming a coalition have reached stalemate.

    And Nationalists are accusing two Labour parliamentarians of putting pressure on the party’s councillors not to agree a deal with them.

    "

    http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/coalition-talks-in-deadlock-amid-claims-of-outside-pressure-1-4441425

    Posted 7 years ago #
  5. kaputnik
    Moderator

    This is possibly the best way I have ever seen STV shown off

    Yes, indeed. It really helped, and I'd just spent 2 days working the system out for myself with graphs and spreadsheets.

    The only thing it didn't emphasise was how many people were not voting to the bottom of the list. I looked at all the wards in Edinburgh and about half of them in quite some detail (and went into the actual raw, anonymised ballot data for 3 of them).

    My observations were.

    Conservative 1st pref voters were far more likely than others to only make 1 preference (i.e. Tory). Like 40-50% in most wards didn't vote beyond the first Tory candidate.

    Where Tory vote did reallocate on 2nd preferences, it preferentially went Lib Dem. This was not reciprocated by Lib Dem vote, which tended to go more Labour/Green.

    SNP voters followed the SNP 1-2-3 or SNP 1&2 message very closely too. There was a not insubstantial number though (~15%) who didn't vote for both or all of their candidates, which seemed silly. Labour and Lib Dem voters unsurprisingly didn't really put SNP high up their preferences. While the vote went preferentially to Green, it wasn't really a massive boost to the Greens as not enough SNP votes were putting Green at 3 or 4, and Labour were often just as likely to get the 2nd preferences as Greens.

    Green 1st prefs were the best at voting to the bottom of the list. The Greens did well where they got in by getting a strong round of 1st prefs, and then picking up a substantial reallocation (say 10-15%) from all the other candidates (except the Tories). Green 1st pref votes reallocated much more in favour of Labour than Lib Dems.

    Some of the Socialist Labour Party vote in Leith found it's way to the Conservative candidate!

    The Labour vote was substantially making only 2 (i.e. both Labour candidates) or 3 choices, generally the 3rd being Lib Dem.

    All voters, regardless of party of 1st pref, seemed to favour voting 3 times. I'm not sure why that is, if they thought it was just 3 preferences they could make or if they thought a 3 member ward you only got 3 choices. Who knows?

    My main observation is that the electorate is really not too clued up on STV as a system. "They" get it in Ireland, because the parties get it too and make sure the voters are well informed about how to vote. Looking at the posters with messages like "Vote Conservative 1", "Vote SNP 1-2-3", "All you need is Labour 1 & 2", it's quite clear that the parties here either don't understand the system or are unwilling to exploit it for their benefit (or benefit of parties that might work with them). I think a lot of this is the fairly closed mindset of parties here from the days of X-in the box and first past the post. They seem unwilling to make official alliances for mutual benefit, they are all focussed on trying to win a very unlikely majority.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  6. fimm
    Member

    Interesting analysis kaputnik.
    (Dumb question: is this the first time we've had STV?)

    I wonder if one of the issues with the parties not trying to pick up 3rd/4th/whatever preference votes is that that would involve admitting that people would not put their party first?

    What sort of thing happens in Northern Ireland? Any links to actual examples?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  7. Frenchy
    Member

    @fimm - STV has been used for council elections since 2007, so this is the third time we've used it.

    EDIT: I think kaputnik was referring to the Republic of Ireland, where they use STV to elect the Dáil (lower house of their parliament).

    Posted 7 years ago #
  8. chdot
    Admin

    "My main observation is that the electorate is really not too clued up on STV as a system"

    Inc some EN commenters -

    "

    Frankly all the parties are to blame for this shambles, not one of them had the guts to put forward enough candidates to form an administration!

    "

    Posted 7 years ago #
  9. steveo
    Member

    Inc some EN commenters -

    Hands up any one who's surprised at that!

    Posted 7 years ago #
  10. SRD
    Moderator

    "All voters, regardless of party of 1st pref, seemed to favour voting 3 times. I'm not sure why that is, if they thought it was just 3 preferences they could make or if they thought a 3 member ward you only got 3 choices. Who knows?"

    I'm disinclined to vote for someone who has not contacted me or at least leafletted me. if others are inclined the same way, then it might explain the 1-2-3 vote - assuming they only had a sense of a few of the candidates.

    that said, this election I behaved like a 'typical' green first pref according to your description and voted 1-6.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  11. crowriver
    Member

    @kaputnik, from memory the exact same pattern of voting occurred in 2012, i.e.. Tories mostly voting once only, Labour mostly voting only Labour, etc.

    Another observation is that it's quite rare for the final outcome in each ward not to reflect the proportion of first preference votes. There were a few exceptions to this though, enough to make it interesting.

    As I am in Leith Walk ward, I had 10 candidates to choose from (voted for 8: I refuse to vote Tory or former UKIP "independent"). Many wards though did not have so much choice, instead just having 2 or even 3 candidates from larger parties. It would be good to see a more diverse set of parties/candidates in a greater number of wards next time around.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  12. kaputnik
    Moderator

    I did some standing around time with a rosette and a smile on outside one of our local polling stations.

    I was accosted by a lady on the way out who asked "how come the SNP get to stand 3 candidates"? in a manner which made me think she thought they were being given an unfair advantage (I was not in an SNP rosette). I tried to explain that parties can stand as many candidates as they think have a chance of getting elected without splitting their own vote, but she didn't hang around.

    I think in the 2 or 3 wards where the SNP did put up 3 candidates it was a bit unrealistic and they should have stuck to 2. I don't think any other party put up 3 in any ward off the top of my head, and the Tories mainly put up 1 and did very nearly exactly as well as the SNP did. Don't think Labour managed to get any 2nd candidate in any ward.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  13. fimm
    Member

    Sorry, wrong part of Ireland. Apologies.

    This means I must have voted STV before but I don't remember or remember what I did!

    I have no idea who leafleted us and who didn't, as BOFFOF transferred all the leaflets straight from the doormat to the recycling box (apart from some Labour leaflets that were shoved under the main door which someone else shifted before I got to them).

    Posted 7 years ago #
  14. crowriver
    Member

    "BOFFOF transferred all the leaflets straight from the doormat to the recycling box"

    Yeah I did that too (except for the Green one). From memory, we had leaflets from Tories, Labour, Lib Dems and Greens (received in that order) and personalised mailshot letters from the SNP. Tories and SNP seemed fixated on UK politics such as referendums, rights of EU citizens, hard Brexit, etc. which I found irritating (and largely irrelevant) in a local election.

    I researched the other candidates online, from a list, possibly on council web site or Broughton Spurtle/Edinburgh Reporter. Intrigued that Socialist Labour Party were only contesting two wards in Scotland, one was Leith Walk. Their manifesto is online if anyone's interested: pro-cycling and public transport as you might expect.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  15. Frenchy
    Member

    @fimm - turns out Northern Ireland also uses STV to elect the Assembly, and also for electing their MEPs.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  16. slowcoach
    Member

    thanks for the link Stickman.
    As Kaputnik says it doesn't emphasise was how many people were not voting to the bottom of the list or how many votes didn't count as valid. In some seats the difference between the turnout and the final total of votes was more than the winning candidates got.

    From watching one of the counts, a high proportion of disallowed papers had marked two candidates from the same party as X, rather than 1 and 2. Some had put "1 and 2" against both their preferred party's candidates.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  17. HankChief
    Member

    I think the Morningside ward is quite interesting.

    The elimination of the 2nd Tory gave over 400 more votes to LD than SNP which just got him home

    Posted 7 years ago #
  18. ih
    Member

    " From watching one of the counts, a high proportion of disallowed papers had marked two candidates from the same party as X, rather than 1 and 2."

    This is worrying as I'm sure that most people who turn up to vote do want to record a valid vote. The various voting procedures in use in Scotland are not necessarily easy to follow though (they're not all politics junkies like us on CCE) and I think there is a good case for a very clear and simple verbal instruction being given to each voter that turns up.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  19. HankChief
    Member

    Was it not 2007 when we had a FPTP & STV vote on the same day and it went badly (in terms of spoiled ballots)?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  20. slowcoach
    Member

    ih: both times when I was in polling stations last week the officials were clearly saying to use numbers not a cross - maybe it was different in other areas.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  21. chdot
    Admin

    Another one (AltFacts)

    "

    the chimp 12:12 PM on 10/05/2017

    Considering all first preference votes were Conservative and LibDem - why are the others getting anywhere near this?

    "

    Read more at: http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/coalition-talks-in-deadlock-amid-claims-of-outside-pressure-1-4441425#comments-area

    Posted 7 years ago #
  22. chdot
    Admin

    " From watching one of the counts, a high proportion of disallowed papers had marked two candidates from the same party as X, rather than 1 and 2."

    My understanding is that this will count as a spoiled paper, because there isn't a 'clear preference' - though it's clear that the voter only wanted to support one party.

    Voting X, 2 is accepted.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  23. Frenchy
    Member

    @HankChief - Aye - something like 150 000 rejected ballots.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  24. ih
    Member

    @slowcoach The message clearly isn't getting through though.

    Any "instruction" would obviously have to strike a balance between being informative and patronising. It might be appropriate to ask the voter for some response to the advice to make sure they got it. I would prefer to be slightly patronised than under informed.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  25. Murun Buchstansangur
    Member

    On voting systems:

    Northern Ireland: STV used for European Parliament, Northern Ireland Assembly and local councils. Westminster is first-past-the-post obviously

    Republic of Ireland: STV used for European Parliament, the Dáil and local councils. Alternative vote used for electing the Uachtarán/President

    Naturally enough, with more exposure and consistency to it, both electorates and the parties involved are a lot more savvy to STV's nuances than the recent Scottish results.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  26. Murun Buchstansangur
    Member

    @slowcoach - I think the consistency of this advice from the polling station staff between polling stations/different voters is a issue, maybe it was dependent on time/busyness. I got the spiel, my wife reported that she didn't (or even the offer of it, though she didn't need it). Surely, for fairness, all voters need to at least be offered advice if some voters are getting it?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  27. mgj
    Member

    Westminster is Plurality; France is 'first past the post' if any system is.

    Plurality - most votes wins; there is no percentage of votes or electors needed.

    France - 50% of votes cast+1 to be elected, with multi-round voting if necessary, designed to bind in the PCF to the polity

    Posted 7 years ago #
  28. kaputnik
    Moderator

    The clerk at my polling station was telling everyone to use numbers and as many/few as they wanted in order of preference. But I suppose it varies from clerk to clerk and station to station.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  29. chdot
    Admin

    "The clerk at my polling station was telling everyone "

    Hmm complete silence (apart from name/address confirmation).

    Whatever happens, should be uniform(?)

    Posted 7 years ago #
  30. crowriver
    Member

    I wasn't given any instructions when I voted. My station clerk was like chdot's. Just as well I knew how to do it...

    OTOH there are written instructions on the ballot paper.

    Posted 7 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin