So they won. Big deal?

Despite the best efforts of many of us, the result of yesterday’s referendum on electoral reform was a sadly predictable “No”. One way we could respond to that would be to mourn the death of democracy, to stare glumly into our whisky, and become so disillusioned and disenfranchised that we give up. Our prediction that this was our only chance for a generation becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Why let that happen?

Meh to AV (my version)

This post just collates a handful of my tweets on AV, for those who missed them earlier today:

Please, anybody who intends to vote #no2av, do it because you understand both systems and believe FPTP is better. No other reason. #yes2av—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

Not caring is NOT a reason to vote #no2av. It would be better for you to spoil your paper, and allow those who do care to decide. #yes2av—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

Not understanding the question is not a reason to vote #no2av. If you cannot make an informed decision, then spoil your paper. #yes2av—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

Preferring STV is not a reason to vote #no2av, as STV is not an option. Choose between the two boxes on the paper, or spoil it. #yes2av—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

I understand that the wording of the question is misleading. To make this clear: neither a #yes2av nor a #no2av result means further reform.—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

Being misled by either side is not a reason to vote #no2av. If you don't want to find out the facts, spoil your paper. #yes2av—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

I am not being facetious. A large number of spoilt papers will send a message to those who are paying attention. #yes2av #no2av—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

I believe that #yes2av is the right choice. But I am trying to make it clear that there is a third option when you cast your vote. #no2av—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

Your voting options are: #yes2av, #no2av, or draw a big cock on the paper. Please do the third if you're unsure.—
Julian Yon (@julianyon) April 19, 2011

If you are unsure what AV is, I would encourage you to read my previous article on the subject. A number of people say that they found it helpful.

One Man, One Vote

“Ankh-Morpork had dallied with many forms of government and had ended up with that form of democracy known as One Man, One Vote. The Patrician was the Man, he had the Vote.” (Mort, Terry Pratchett)

I am again writing in response to a specific concern raised on Twitter. The context is the forthcoming referendum to decide whether the UK should adopt AV (the Alternative Vote system, also known as Instant Runoff Voting) for its general elections.

Open letter to Maria Miller

FAO: Maria Miller

Dear Maria Miller,

Please engage with us re: DLA and ESA reforms

I am a disabled and long-term sick citizen of this country. Prior to becoming incapacitated I worked hard, and although currently unable to work in paid employment I still contribute to society in various ways, including by raising my children one of whom has very special needs. 

I wish to echo the sentiments of an open letter which has been addressed to you, and I include the full text here:

Dear Maria Miller, 

Before I start, I have a small request. When you talk about “The Disabled” could you please add “The Sick” in there sometimes? Only, millions of people with long term illnesses often face the greatest barriers to work but are rarely mentioned, if considered at all.

You see, I first started lobbying ministers about ESA back in 2009 and was surprised to listen to a half hour speech by the then disabilities minister Jonathan Shaw that failed to mention illness once. Obviously with political and business will it is possible to modify workplaces to facilitate the lives of the blind or deaf or immobile in employment. It’s just not so easy to modify for exhaustion or pain or vomiting. A few months later I met with Mr Shaw who made it clear that he didn’t really know anything at all about the issues faced by those who are suffer from long term variable or degenerative conditions.

It seemed a little that way when you, Maria “answered” questions online at Guardian Money. Of 250 questions, you replied to 6, often with answers that were strangely irrelevant; you didn’t seem sure whether the over 65s would be able to continue claiming DLA? You didn’t seem to know which research your own department had based its conclusions on? I read your response to our little online chat this morning;

Miller says she believes that the rising unease will settle once the full details of the proposed changes become clear and is convinced that much of the anger has been triggered by a failure to understand the government’s objectives.

“I often hear concerns that are based on a lack of detailed information of what we are talking about in terms of our reforms. People need to get the facts rather than speculation,” she says. “The anxiety can often be based on the fact that we are dealing with very complex benefits. The government is going to reform and simplify the whole system.”

Oh dear, dear, dear. This really isn’t the way to go at all. I am a fairly moderate (and I like to think reasonable) campaigner, but I can already hear the howls of outrage from every corner of the UK as people read that their brains are now being called into question as well as their disabilities.

You see we don’t have much else. We can’t get about much, we might live in terrible pain or despair. We may have had to give up our hobbies or our dreams, but we like to think that we can still use our brains. We have little still available to us, but we can analyse, dissect and appraise. Of the campaigners I know, one is a PHD student, two are lawyers, one is the CEO of a major charity and I myself have a degree. We’ve read the green papers or white papers or CSRs in detail and have an excellent grasp of what changes will mean. We’re just not always sure you’ve done the same.

I’m sorry to shout the next bit but I’m running out of ways to make the next point in a way you might notice :

SICK AND DISABLED PEOPLE ARE NOT AGAINST ALL REFORM – FAR FROM IT.
WE SIMPLY WANT TO ENGAGE WITH YOU TO ENSURE REFORM IS SUCCESSFUL.

We hear very often that you listen to and consult with health and disability groups over your current proposals, but I can find little evidence of this.  These charities have written to you asking to meet, whilst other leading charities wrote to the Times begging you to listen and engage. You’ve never contacted myself or other cyber-campaign groups like the Broken of Britain.

If you press ahead with changes to ESA and DLA as they stand, you will find a Poll Tax/Iraq sized albatross hanging around your necks. There are some very damaging proposals in both reforms and it is in no way dramatic to state that they will cause great hardship, poverty, distress and even death. Why not iron things out while it’s still not too late? Why not change things in a way that will achieve your supposed objectives? This is an issue that gains enormous support and coverage online – my own blog has gone from nowhere to become the 23rd highest ranked political blog in the UK in just 4 months and it is only a matter of time before stories of destitution and suicide make this a national issue that won’t go away.

Many campaigners can only conclude that the entire exercise is a cost cutting measure. Can you blame them when George Osborne announced how much he would save through these measures before a single reassessment had even taken place? The rhetoric used in this debate has often being accusatory and intimidating “Cheats mugging the country” “Skivers and Scroungers” This has often been fuelled by your own press releases and really needs to stop if we are ever to have a reasoned debate on the issue.

All I can do is ask, yet again, that you stop and listen. When something is truly unjust, those who fight it will win in the end. Surely it is better to do it together and with respect than through endless Daily Mail headlines and suffering?

Please understand that although the words above are not my own, I fully agree with them and therefore this communication is on my own behalf.

I look forward to your response.

Julian Yon

Constituents of Ms Miller (Basingstoke) can email her at:

millerm@parliament.uk

Ministerial correspondence can be sent to:

ministers@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

Edit: The original author of the letter is Sue Marsh therefore please ensure you have her permission to reuse for anything other than its intended purpose.

I wanted to buy a house

I wanted to buy a house.

The nationalists said I had no right to live here. They would take my house from me.

The capitalists said I should buy several, create scarcity, protect my investment.

The democrats called for a referendum.

The socialists were suspicious. They did not understand why I would need to buy a house.

The communists said I had no right to my own home. They would take my house from me.

The anarchists were least concerned. Good luck, they said. Just remember it doesn’t really belong to you.

I Agree With Knickers

I’ve created a Facebook page “I Agree With Knickers”. Please like it to show your discontent with Nick Clegg, and encourage your friends to do so. It might not change anything, but it’s a nonviolent way to show solidarity. Cheers.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/I-Agree-With-Knickers/172851716070230

I won’t be voting for you (pt3)

I have received a second reply from Alex Williams, our Tory candidate. Oddly, he seems to be unaware that the Digital Economy Act has already been passed, and writes in the future tense:

I won’t be voting for you (pt2)

I have received a response from Kate Green (the emphasis is my own):

Dear Mr Yon

Thanks for getting in touch. I’m proud to be standing as the Labour party candidate, and very proud of the many achievements of the Labour governemnt [sic] since 1997. I am committed to representing the people of Stretford and Urmston in parliament – as Bev Hughes has done. I simply don’t believe independent candidates are either as effective or as accountable to the electorate.

best wishes

Kate Green

Labour parliamentary candidate for Stretford and Urmston

I think that is the funniest thing I’ve read during all of this tragic week.

UPDATE @12:37: Alex Williams (Tory candidate) has responded simply with “Thank you for your comments.“

Dear candidate: I won’t be voting for you

Our current MP Beverley Hughes did not vote last night on the Digital Economy Bill. Nor has she bothered to reply to my correspondence on the issue. As she is standing down, I have written the following letter to the person who wishes to be her successor:

Increased Resolve

In my earlier post I expressed that I might “even organise a campaign or two of my own. Although if I’m honest that’s more likely to be next year.”

Reading that back made me feel a tad uncomfortable. I could hear myself saying something meant genuinely, but ultimately meaningless. “Tomorrow,” he said, “I’m going to quit procrastinating.”