....Who cares....?

 

No, seriously, will it really make a difference...? When you consider about half the country doesn't even bother to vote anyway.....

 

And, well, let's put it this way, the political system in this country is morally bankrupt anyway - we've had the Iraq war, we've had MPs expenses, and in the past, we've had "Lord" Archer going to prison HIMSELF for perjury and lying, taking money under false pretences, soliciting prostitutes, Johnathan Aitken, another MP who went to jail.... We've got "Lord" Mandy who's as crooked as a dog's hind leg, ditto with TAX EVADER Lord Ashcroft... So, a pretty crooked bunch actually embedded into the system, what difference does it make if crooks in prison are allowed to vote...?

 

Actually, I think it'd be amusing - can you imagine Cameron, Clegg and Milliband on the election trail in HMP Holloway, Pentonville or Wormwood Scrubs...? :lol: :lol: I'd also be interested to see what the voting turn-out percentage turns out to be amongst the criminal element...... Wouldn't it be funny if prisoners had a higher turn out than the general public...?

 

Yes, indeed.... ^_^

I wonder what slant the Daily Wail will take on it all - the interfering Europe slant, or the 'this is gerrymandering it for Labour as they're so soft on crime' slant?

It's the right thing to do. It's ridiculous that someone who's locked up for 2 weeks for parking fines shouldn't get to vote in elections.

I don't mind people like who get parking fines voting, but not murderers and peadophile.

I actually think prisoners SHOULD be allowed to vote. They are Citizens after all.

It has yet to be decided which prisoners should get the vote. At the very least I suspect prisoners serving a life sentence with no chance of parole will still be deprived of the vote.

 

The current system is just plain daft. Someone who receives a 12-month sentence today is likely to be released around 2 May next year after serving half of their sentence. They will therefore be able to vote in the Alternative Vote referendum and, if applicable, local elections a few days later. However, someone given the same sentence for exactly the same offence next week will just miss out. Such an arbitrary system makes no sense.

I think there should be a sliding scale. Minor infractions should be allowed to vote.

 

Anyone who has committed a violent or serious crime shouldn't be allowed to vote imo

I don't see why anybody on anything less than a life sentence should not be permitted to vote - after all, these are people who are going to be expected to be reincorporated into society at some point. Prison ought to be just as much about rehabilitation as punishment - permitting them to vote shows that they are still accepted as citizens rather than being rejected completely.

Exactly how many people (or what percentage of the prison population) are inside for life? Very very few - so it's not really going to make much difference if they can vote or not. Personally I think they should, right to vote for your leaders is a human right and it's a sliding scale from depriving someone of that to depriving them of other rights - right to life for instance.

And of course there's Bobby Sands, who was elected MP whilst he was in jail (and on hunger strike as well). He lasted less than a month, then the government changed the rule to make sure it couldn't happen again.

 

I'd be interested to see what political parties the prison population would vote for (I wonder if there's ever been a poll that has looked at this. I'd love to be enlightened). If as a whole they're more likely to vote for Labour, then I can see why the Conservatives would want to stop them from voting.

I think Prisoners should have the vote, if they are in for less than a year. It only seems fair, I don't think a Murderer or Rapist deserves to vote, at all.

MPs have voted today to keep the blanket ban on prisoners voting, defying the European Court's ruling. What happns next is unclear - because we don't have a written Constitution, it's not actually clearly set out in law whether Parliament or the European Court has the higher authority in this country.

 

I'm disappointed to see the Labour leadership opportunistically joining in with the Tories in supporting the ban. Personally, I'm happy with every single prisoner, bar none, having the vote: keeping a mass murderer locked up protects us by stopping him murdering people; letting him vote in elections doesn't keep us any safer. It just seems so punitive to me, not to mention anti-democratic - what's stopping a government one day theoretically locking up anyone who said they would vote for their opponents, thus depriving them of the vote?

MPs have voted today to keep the blanket ban on prisoners voting, defying the European Court's ruling. What happns next is unclear - because we don't have a written Constitution, it's not actually clearly set out in law whether Parliament or the European Court has the higher authority in this country.

 

I'm disappointed to see the Labour leadership opportunistically joining in with the Tories in supporting the ban. Personally, I'm happy with every single prisoner, bar none, having the vote: keeping a mass murderer locked up protects us by stopping him murdering people; letting him vote in elections doesn't keep us any safer. It just seems so punitive to me, not to mention anti-democratic - what's stopping a government one day theoretically locking up anyone who said they would vote for their opponents, thus depriving them of the vote?

Precisely. Every other European country except Ireland and Liechtenstein give at least some prisoners the vote so it's not as if we are being expected to do something revolutionary. As it is, we face the prospect of the government having to pay out hundreds of millions of pounds, at least some of which will go the prisoners who have been deprived of a vote. What a total waste of taxpayers' money.

I think this just applies to England and Wales.

 

I'm sure i read something the other day about Scottish Prisoners getting the vote. We do after all have a distinct legal system and i'm sure Prisons and such like is a devolved area of government.

I think this just applies to England and Wales.

 

I'm sure i read something the other day about Scottish Prisoners getting the vote. We do after all have a distinct legal system and i'm sure Prisons and such like is a devolved area of government.

 

This will affect Northern Ireland and Scotland too, the BBC article seems to say so.

This will affect Northern Ireland and Scotland too, the BBC article seems to say so.

It's quite likely i just misread a headline.

 

It could have been a doom-mongering Daily Mail one about how prisoners getting the vote will kill puppies and cause cancer or something.

Does anyone know where I can see who voted for what in this motion? I'd find it interesting to see who voted on what side.

Does anyone know where I can see who voted for what in this motion? I'd find it interesting to see who voted on what side.

Here

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/c...cmdebate/20.htm

 

Thanks Si.

 

So only one Conservative MP, Peter Bottomly, actually voted against the motion. Quelle surprise.

..And on the day that MPs got all "moralistic" about prisoners possibly getting the vote, two former MPs are getting sent down for a bit of porridge after nicking thousands off the tax-payers.... :rolleyes: