tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post6191580571623085923..comments2024-03-28T07:16:39.621+00:00Comments on Lallands Peat Worrier: Sturgeon's Scotland: no "progressive beacon". Lallands Peat Worrierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18276270498204697708noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-38492747620945702492013-05-13T12:08:14.372+01:002013-05-13T12:08:14.372+01:00Doug,
An interesting question; I've not seen ...Doug,<br /><br />An interesting question; I've not seen Scottish polling on prisoner voting rights. I'd assume that it would mirror what we see in the rest of the United Kingdom, and attachment to the idea that prisoners should continue to be disenfranchised. I didn't touch on it in the piece, but there is obviously a democratic argument to be made here too. As one commenter on twitter noted, the "problem" isn't so much the SNP's progressive credentials, but the lack of progressive sentiment amongst the populace at large. That's the argument, anyway.Lallands Peat Worrierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07238432265194046726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-22810805251180320762013-05-13T12:05:29.334+01:002013-05-13T12:05:29.334+01:00RevStu,
I do understand that position, and I dare...RevStu,<br /><br />I do understand that position, and I dare say several more folk hold it than agree with me. As I tried to gesture to in the piece, I can also see why the SNP leadership - even if some of them were relaxed about granting some or all prisoners the vote - decided not to tread on this particular unexploded mine. If I'd been advising them behind the scenes, I couldn't swear that I wouldn't have suggested it either, out of venal calculation. Lallands Peat Worrierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07238432265194046726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-22639111861783647242013-05-13T12:01:27.995+01:002013-05-13T12:01:27.995+01:00Michael,
An interesting point of democratic theor...Michael,<br /><br />An interesting point of democratic theory, though not one really explored in the parliamentary debate. Who knows? Maybe some likely character will address it in the chamber on Tuesday...Lallands Peat Worrierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07238432265194046726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-16503811253448073212013-05-13T11:16:11.559+01:002013-05-13T11:16:11.559+01:00"Even if you agree as a matter of principle t...<i>"Even if you agree as a matter of principle that convicted prisoners should be disenfranchised, Nicola's emaciated justification for this policy is not terrifically convincing."</i><br /><br />Hmmm. I think she just about gets away with it, since there is nothing a 16 year old can do to prevent themselves being under 18 on the day of the referendum, whereas a criminal could merely have avoided committing the crime that put them in jail. At least, I suspect that's how much of the electorate would see it.<br /><br />The media, on the other hand, would simply see it as the SNP needing to bribe criminals to win independence, or something silly like that. I'm not a fan of basing political decisions purely on the expected media fallout, but it's harder to condemn in some cases than in others.<br /><br />Quite simply, there is no moral justification for preventing 16 year olds getting the vote, however there can certainly be a case made for preventing prisoners voting. Whether it's correct or not is a different matter, but if I was in jail, I'd probably consider incarceration being a bigger infringement of my human rights than being prevented from voting.<br /><br />Judge Daniel rules "Not Proven".Doug Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15017218581660887134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-25366040804858565632013-05-12T23:00:57.412+01:002013-05-12T23:00:57.412+01:00My feelings on this aren't enormously strong, ...My feelings on this aren't enormously strong, but I must admit that I struggle to see it as any sort of dreadful outrage against human rights. If you're not prepared to obey the laws of a society, what business do you have in determining who makes them? <br /><br />I haven't been aware for the 40-odd years of my life of any great groundswell of opinion demanding the vote for prisoners, and I must confess myself perplexed as to why one's suddenly arisen now, not to mention why anyone would specifically expect the *SNP* to enact it when it would so obviously be political suicide.RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-77058471794650386062013-05-12T12:30:21.772+01:002013-05-12T12:30:21.772+01:00Haven't civil societies moved on from this que...Haven't civil societies moved on from this question? I would argue that the 'Right to Vote' is less of a right and more of a civic duty. If it is a civic duty of all citizens to vote then it changes the question entirely. One must come up with a compelling reason to exclude anyone from voting and I would submit that being in jail is insufficient grounds for exclusion. Michael Granadoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05278600473578568828noreply@blogger.com