Vote on it again until you get it right ...


While I was treasurer of the University of Bristol Union I once asked for a recount on a very close vote by show of hands. The recount gave a different outcome, and one of the people who had voted for the original result accused me of operating the policy of "vote on it again until you get it right."

I don't think that is a fair characterisation of asking for a recount when there are only a handful of votes in it, but people do sometimes act like that, and the EU is a particular culprit.

However, I've had to confront twice in the past few days - once in the case of a comment on this blog, and once at a meeting which discussed the issue of Nuclear waste - that there are some issues which you can't just drop when the first proposal to be voted on falls.

Suppose there is a proposal to change the electoral system to AV or STV, to declare independence from some wider group, to sign a particular treaty, and it is voted down by a clear margin the electorate.

In any of these cases the response of a believer in democracy should be "the people have rejected it, drop it."

At the other extreme, many organisations have to set a budget, and it is by no means unheard of for the first proposed budget put forward to be voted down.

In this case it would be an act of complete insanity to say "the budget has been voted down so people don't want a budget and we're not going to have one." You have to keep trying to work out a compromise budget until you get one which can be agreed.

This isn't "Vote on it again until you get it right" but "Vote on budget options until you get a package which the majority can support."

There are other issues on which some positive decision has to be taken and the first proposal put forward being voted down does not mean that the issue can be dropped.

Dealing with the nuclear waste which already exists in this country, of which we have hundreds of tons, (most of it currently stored within fifteen miles of my home) is such an example.

That nuclear waste did not magically disappear when Cumbria County Council's cabinet voted against continuing with the original "Managing Radioactive Waste Safely" process.

The waste is still there, it will still exist whether or not we have a new generation of nuclear power plants, and any responsible government will still have a duty to work out what is the best place to deal with it.

I hope the government will make a genuine attempt to address the issues raised by Cumbria's cabinet when they voted to stop the previous process, such as providing a guarantee that a community which starts the process will be able to pull out if the deal on the table is not good enough.

I will be interested to see whether any council located in a part of the country other than West Cumbria comes forward. (But I would strongly advise ministers not to hold their breath while they wait.)

But the government is being right and responsible in continuing to trying to find a solution to the problem of nuclear waste. It isn't "Vote on it again until you get it right" but "Vote on options to deal with nuclear waste until you get a safe, long-term solution which the majority of people in the district where the waste ends up can support."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Nick Herbert on his visit to flood hit areas of Cumbria

Quotes of the day 19th August 2020

Quote of the day 24th July 2020