I take it that you haven't an answer to the question
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Nothing wrong at all with making them learn English. That’s a sensible position to adopt.From the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/05/johnson-pledges-to-make-all-immigrants-learn-english?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
Johnson pledges to make all immigrants learn English
Tory leadership contender says English is not first language in ‘too many parts of our country’
Make? and what else will he "make" them do? wear ethnicity badges perhaps?
Here is a recent shot of the Dear Leader
First language is usually regarded as the language you are Born into.
Last edited:
They’ve even managed to screw up the Boris / Hunt voting process, sending two vote forms to some members. How hard can it be post a form to someone, once only.
This isn’t looking very encouraging for the time when the mildly difficult stuff starts. I dare not think what’s going to happen when difficult arrives.
This isn’t looking very encouraging for the time when the mildly difficult stuff starts. I dare not think what’s going to happen when difficult arrives.
You ignore any answers, I, m fed up with explaining my reasons, its pointless saying anything to you OG. Putting it simply, I, m ignoring you.
This isn’t looking very encouraging for the time when the mildly difficult stuff starts. I dare not think what’s going to happen when difficult arrives.
[/QUOTE]
I would not worry. Whenever I was required to engage in postal ballots, ..trade union strike action etc, getting extra ballot papers would not have been difficult, but rigging the vote would be. A firm of chartered accountants would be commissioned by the union, and each postal ballot would have been in a sealed envelope. Ones signature would be written across the flap. This envelop would be placed in another envelope,with ones union branch , membership number on it and the composite then put into a third envelope with the counting centre address
The counting centre would open the top envelope and confirm ones eligibility against a single register., And then open the next envelope and pass the ballots ,on the the next stage. It would just check that the little envelope had not been tampered with. , Open it and put the ballots into a big box.
Finally the ballots would be counted by a third person.
[/QUOTE]
I would not worry. Whenever I was required to engage in postal ballots, ..trade union strike action etc, getting extra ballot papers would not have been difficult, but rigging the vote would be. A firm of chartered accountants would be commissioned by the union, and each postal ballot would have been in a sealed envelope. Ones signature would be written across the flap. This envelop would be placed in another envelope,with ones union branch , membership number on it and the composite then put into a third envelope with the counting centre address
The counting centre would open the top envelope and confirm ones eligibility against a single register., And then open the next envelope and pass the ballots ,on the the next stage. It would just check that the little envelope had not been tampered with. , Open it and put the ballots into a big box.
Finally the ballots would be counted by a third person.
It’s the fact that they sent two forms to some voters that demonstrates the incompetence. Posting a form to a person is a simple task which could be executed by a child, yet the “professionals” mess it up.
Thank you for your reassuring words, which were based upon illustrating your knowledge of a ballot counting process. Unfortunately, the counting process wasn’t my concern, it was the schoolboy error of sending two forms out in such a critical and important ballot to choose a Prime Minister.
Last edited:
may be their database duplicates some entries. Imagine someone leaving the conservatives in 2016 for UKIP then rejoined in 2017. The database would have two entries, one has lapsed, the other live. If voting cards are sent out by the mailing list then lapsed memberships may also get sent a voting card.
But sending voting cards/forms to lapsed members is itself a major screw-up.
it's an easy mistake. You may have in your records a field for 'membership expiry date' that you use to send out invitations to renew. If you want to extract a simple mailing list for your regular marketing leaflets, you may make a mistake by not setting criteria (such as > now) for such a field. Subsequently, that mailing list may be used to send voting cards.
I agree it is an easy mistake to make. That is why it is so bad that they made it!
So easy and so obvious that it should have been guarded against. For example, sort extracted list into alphabetical order (by name, by address, by postcode) and manually check those names/addresses (or reasonably close approximations) which could indicate a mistake.
Seems they are relying on the integrity of their members not to repeat vote. Some hope!
Come on, it’s not difficult to reconcile a database, particularly searching it for duplicate entries. This is a basic schoolboy error made under the most important circumstances.
Now it gets really confusing.. Does the Tory Party select the PM,or is it the Parliament or is it the Queen?.
No it is the counting process you do need to concern yourself with. The bits of paper at this stage are just confetti,it is the signed ballots which have importance.
the database isn't faulty. You set the filter criteria with a simple mistake, then call it 'a honest mistake' if you cause could do with one.
if they want a more rigorous process, they can opt to do that online.
Yes
And thank you for demonstrating that you know G Wilson is not the same as George Wilson.
Last edited:
Yes - I do. Yes - it is not always trivial. But in this case, it isn't that they need to reconcile a whole database. A statistically-based sampling process would likely have highlighted some cases to look at further. And when they did, the issue should have been obvious.
I'll also point out that the Companies House database does not properly reconcile people. There are many entries which have the same real-world person under more than one name - very often changes of "middle" names and initials. It is a widespread issue. Hence, as I have already said, very well-known and easy to at least start to protect yourself against.
If they are happy to trust their members not to vote multiple times, they might as well have printed a ballot paper in, say, the Barclays' daily telegraph. Cut out and don't keep. In fact, by placing all the onus on the voters, and then relying on thorough post-vote checking, they might have caught out the disreputable members who would vote more than once.
It isn't always easy for older people, and especially difficult for Muslim women who often have limited contact with British people. I think it's sufficient that their young learn English, which they do with remarkable speed and are often the family translators.
All around me in London there's a mixture of many languages being spoken all the time and it doesn't worry me. What they are speaking about is none of my business anyway.
.
Some people have two addresses and have communicated with the party from both locations at times. Others have communicated from their workplace as well at times.
Both have apparently led to them being recorded in two places, resulting in papers being sent to both.
I can understand this since for 26 years I had two home addresses in different counties and it did on occasion cause a problem.
.
Whereas the homeless can find it impossible to vote at all.