Pat Synge
Does the word ‘democratist’ exist? Does compulsory voting actually make elections more ‘democratic’? The first is easy: it doesn’t. But there’s no good reason why not and I suppose Premier Bartlett couldn’t very well describe himself as a Democrat. The second is far harder. It’s a classic debating topic and has strong arguments both for and against…
Last week David Barlett suggested that voting in local council elections should be made compulsory and, claiming to be a ‘democratist’, suggested that this would somehow help make Councils more ‘democratic’. This raises a couple of questions. Does the word ‘democratist’ exist? Does compulsory voting actually make elections more ‘democratic’?
The first is easy: it doesn’t. But there’s no good reason why not and I suppose Premier Bartlett couldn’t very well describe himself as a Democrat. The second is far harder. It’s a classic debating topic and has strong arguments both for and against.
Certainly obliging us to vote means that most of those who wouldn’t otherwise bother make the effort (to avoid a fine) but does this make the results more representative of people’s considered opinion? Or does it just increase the ‘donkey vote’? For sure, voting wouldn’t really be compulsory, only attending the polling station but most people, once they’re in the polling booth, make a vote of some kind or other. If they have no interest in politics, no knowledge of the issues or the candidates they’re far more likely to be swayed by spin and slick promotion.
Is this what we want to encourage?
This is criticised as being an elitist argument and ‘democratists’ will claim that ‘having to vote’ actually encourages people take an interest and stimulates them to consider the issues and participate. That’s a good theory but far from certain. One thing that is certain is that it makes elections more expensive: a lot more expensive. And then someone’s got to chase up those who didn’t vote and fine them.
The most effective way of getting people to take an interest and meaningfully participate is to have good ‘civics’ education, a system that people can respect, with politicians (councillors in this case) that are credible and worth voting for. Obliging the apathetic to vote means that ‘time servers’ get elected just because their name is familiar, they have money to spend or they have strong support from political mates. This doesn’t improve the system in any way but can create the impression that government has a mandate simply because they were elected by people ‘forced’ to vote one way or another.
Pat Synge
Lymington
