Letters: Answers lie with voters

editorial image

Trevor Wainwright, Lower Oxford Street, Castleford

There was some interesting comments about the local elections on last week’s letters page.

There was the usual comments - which would probably be the same in Tory strongholds - regarding putting a monkey up or pinning the party rosette on a donkey. What about those who say “same old lot get in, why bother?” The reason is there, they don’t vote but may well be the first to moan.

Julie Russell voted out of thanks to those who died to get her the vote, Paul Pocklington wrote “none of the above” - there’s nothing wrong with that, it is classed as an abstention and he bothered to go and do it. There are some countries that have that on their voting slips and I think it should be mandatory in this country and said so a few elections ago.

How would they go on if the none of the above pooled the most votes? Would they share the losers’ votes between the first two, assuming there are more than two to ensure one of them gets elected? That way is possibly open to fraud. Would there be a re-election with just the top candidates/ What if ‘none of the above’ won again - what would be the next step?

Points to ponder indeed but the answer does lie with the voters.