5 ms·
Well, archaic voting practices are constitutional practice. But the UK constitution is 'unwritten'. That means these practices could be easily changed, given th
by orra 8y ago
Well, archaic voting practices are constitutional practice. But the UK constitution is 'unwritten'. That means these practices could be easily changed, given the will.
In Westminster, voting usually happens by each MP physically moving into one of two lobbies. That is a very time consuming process, that can easily take twenty minutes per vote. There are no ballots, let alone a computerised voting system.
That the recent indicative votes happened on paper is extraordinarily modern. Preferential voting would clearly be a step too far.
- nicky0 8y agoIt's not a complete innovation. Voting on paper has been the practice for some divisions for some time (deferred divisions where instead of voting immediately, MPs vote on paper the next day).
- orra 8y agoThanks for the explanation. Still, it is absurd they don't use paper (or computers) for all votes.
- nicky0 8y agoQuaint maybe but I would not go so far as to say absurd. There is something to be said for physically getting up and indicating your choice that way. Seems to me to give more weight to the process. Pushing a button seems rather clinical by contrast. Plus I am sure they appreciate the piss break.
- hesk 8y agoI find the divisions quite entertaining. At least they don't run the risk of pressing the wrong button when voting.
- isostatic 8y ago> Preferential voting would clearly be a step too far. I believe that's planned for Monday