Compulsory Democracy

With the Home Secretary too busy to remove any of our civil liberties this week, two of his colleagues have decided that we should be forced to take advantage of those that remain to us. A think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research, backed by think-halftracks Geoff Hoon and Peter Hain, has discovered that young people, besides wearing hoods, are "only half as likely to vote as those aged 65 and over", and that poor people are just as troublesome: "11% fewer manual workers voted in 2005 than their non-manual counterparts - more than double the gap when Labour came to power in 1997".

The second point hardly seems cause for concern; it is simply the result of Labour's successful shift of its core vote from people who don't matter to people who do. Nevertheless, Hoon and Hain are worried. "Falling turnouts should concern us all. Differential turnouts are even more disturbing," said Hoon. "Bringing government closer to the people must remain one of our key priorities," said Hain. "This report convinces me more than ever that we must consider radical measures to renew our democracy," said Hoon. "In Australia and other countries, the civic duty to vote reconnects those who are distanced from the democratic and political process, producing consistently high turnouts without any complaints whatsoever about infringing individual liberty," said Hain. The answer, you see, is to make voting compulsory and abstention punishable - you can have any pro-war, pro-privatisation party you like in Tony's Choice Emporium, but failing to enter the mall is simply not an option. We and Australia do, after all, represent the forces of civilisation.

Rather bizarrely, the shadow for constitutional affairs, Oliver Letwin, objects to the idea on the principle that "honest citizens could face fines of £40 or more from zealous town hall bureaucrats for failing to vote. We have already seen how speed cameras and parking fines are being used to rake in ever more money, on top of soaring council tax bills." Perhaps Letwin believes that speeding and illegal parking should not be punished, on the grounds that it causes the Government undeserved revenue; or perhaps he supports the extension of indefinite detention to driving offences.

The Institute for Public Policy Research noted that "people also need to know that their votes will count. Compulsory turnout is not compulsory voting. Ballot papers can be spoiled or can contain options to vote for 'none of the above'"; but it is far from clear that, as the Institute's associate director claims, "only voter duty can stop the haemorrhaging of turnout". The simple inclusion of a "none of the above" option on ballot papers, without introducing a legal compulsion to vote, would mean we could avoid the spectre of yet more back-of-an-envelope NuLab legislation and nip in the bud any neurotic Letwinian misgivings. However, it is not clear whether Hoo and Ha, let alone their beloved leader, are prepared to be quite so permissive of voter destructiveness. After all, if the public are already too lazy to vote, presumably a vote for "none of the above" will mean simply that we are also too lazy to choose.