4 ms·

They push a button on a screen, which is publicly recorded as a vote for, against, abstain or not present. Nowhere near superior systems like the U.K. where me

by iso947 6y ago

They push a button on a screen, which is publicly recorded as a vote for, against, abstain or not present. Nowhere near superior systems like the U.K. where members leave te room, spend a couple of hours queuing to go into one of two rooms, and then see the result later in the day.

dane-pgp 6y ago
I assume you are being sarcastic and actually think that the UK's "analogue" system of voting is worse because it is slower. Let me assure you that making Westminster votes quicker is not the metric we should be optimising for. https://boingboing.net/2019/03/26/jfc-fml-jfc.html https://boingboing.net/2019/03/26/jfc-fml-jfc.html > But actually, a group of Swedish MEPs have revealed that they pressed the wrong button, and have asked to have the record corrected. They have issued a statement saying they'd intended to open a debate on amendments to the Directive so they could help vote down Articles 11 and 13. > We lost on a technicality, and there is no recourse.
- iso947 6y ago
  Hilarious that people actually think “I pressed the wrong button” is a valid defence. How thick are our representatives?
- learnstats2 6y ago
  Counter-example in the UK: where the method of voting is walking into a room with your chums, MPs sometimes have to say that they "accidentally" walked into the wrong room: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-16746389 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-16746389 It's clear your example that they (Swedish MEPs) were all agreed to vote in this direction, since they each press their own button. It's most likely that they didn't understand the significance of the vote and thought better of it afterwards. It's their one job, to vote.
  - dane-pgp 6y ago
    I'm not sure if that UK counter-example is as strong as you suggest: > A spokesman for Mr Stunell, MP for Hazel Grove, said he had voted against the Labour amendment "as he was supposed to" and had gone to get a drink of water for a fellow minister when he found that lobby doors had been "locked". > "He was temporarily on the wrong side but sanity prevailed and they let him out," he said. A funny story, but not a legally significant outcome.
    - learnstats2 6y ago
      Here's another funny example where a UK MP was not able to vote the way they intended: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-mp-locked-himself-toilet-avoid-voting-eu-referendum-after-finding-himself-wrong-voting-lobby-10310948.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-mp-locked... Here, it's suggested that MPs sometimes vote both ways to cancel their own mistake out, although they normally claim that they are taking some nuanced view: https://www.publicwhip.org.uk/boths.php https://www.publicwhip.org.uk/boths.php Not to mention that UK MPs can't vote if they have to be absent for any reason - for example if they have child-care duties. Your original point was that the UK Commons' system of slow voting is foolproof: it isn't.
      - dane-pgp 6y ago
        I don't think I claimed that the UK's system was "foolproof", my point was just that trying to make it faster likely wouldn't make it any better.

by iso947 6y ago

dane-pgp 6y ago

I assume you are being sarcastic and actually think that the UK's "analogue" system of voting is worse because it is slower. Let me assure you that making Westminster votes quicker is not the metric we should be optimising for. https://boingboing.net/2019/03/26/jfc-fml-jfc.html https://boingboing.net/2019/03/26/jfc-fml-jfc.html > But actually, a group of Swedish MEPs have revealed that they pressed the wrong button, and have asked to have the record corrected. They have issued a statement saying they'd intended to open a debate on amendments to the Directive so they could help vote down Articles 11 and 13. > We lost on a technicality, and there is no recourse.

iso947 6y ago
Hilarious that people actually think “I pressed the wrong button” is a valid defence. How thick are our representatives?
learnstats2 6y ago
Counter-example in the UK: where the method of voting is walking into a room with your chums, MPs sometimes have to say that they "accidentally" walked into the wrong room: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-16746389 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-16746389 It's clear your example that they (Swedish MEPs) were all agreed to vote in this direction, since they each press their own button. It's most likely that they didn't understand the significance of the vote and thought better of it afterwards. It's their one job, to vote.
- dane-pgp 6y ago
  I'm not sure if that UK counter-example is as strong as you suggest: > A spokesman for Mr Stunell, MP for Hazel Grove, said he had voted against the Labour amendment "as he was supposed to" and had gone to get a drink of water for a fellow minister when he found that lobby doors had been "locked". > "He was temporarily on the wrong side but sanity prevailed and they let him out," he said. A funny story, but not a legally significant outcome.
  - learnstats2 6y ago
    Here's another funny example where a UK MP was not able to vote the way they intended: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-mp-locked-himself-toilet-avoid-voting-eu-referendum-after-finding-himself-wrong-voting-lobby-10310948.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-mp-locked... Here, it's suggested that MPs sometimes vote both ways to cancel their own mistake out, although they normally claim that they are taking some nuanced view: https://www.publicwhip.org.uk/boths.php https://www.publicwhip.org.uk/boths.php Not to mention that UK MPs can't vote if they have to be absent for any reason - for example if they have child-care duties. Your original point was that the UK Commons' system of slow voting is foolproof: it isn't.
    - dane-pgp 6y ago
      I don't think I claimed that the UK's system was "foolproof", my point was just that trying to make it faster likely wouldn't make it any better.