Comments on: Disenfranchisement.

By: jailhouselawyer

jailhouselawyer — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 01:43:44 +0000

Anna: A good post and thanks for your support.

By: C

Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:11:57 +0000

Prisoners should be allowed to vote if they are likely to be freed during the next parliament.

By: wrinkled weasel

wrinkled weasel — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:35:38 +0000

That scrofulous mountebank, T P Fuller has floated to the top of the pond again. However, I have to agree with him. Hirst waived his “yuman rights” when he smashed his landlady’s head in. Never mind Hirst, anybody who signs on the dole should not be allowed to vote.

By: T. P. Fuller

T. P. Fuller — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:14:25 +0000

@The Slogger and Mr Mind

I concur. A crime is an antisocial act. By committing one a criminal rejects the society in which he lives. Whether he is imprisoned for punishment or rehabilitation, he has forfeited the right the participate in the development of that society until he has done his time (“paid his debt to society”).

Just a quick ad hominem here. Hirst is a convicted axe-murderer and I have never come across any evidence of contrition. Though I am no shrink, his attention-seeking behaviour goes to confirm that there is something seriously wrong with him. I wonder if he is using this issue as his own personal vehicle.

P.S. Anna – I envy you, living in la belle France!

Anna: I believe you will find that John Hurst was convicted of manslaughter, not murder. Of no comfort to his victim of course, but it does mean that he is an axe killer not an axe murderer. I did once go to the trouble of reading the case, and note that after the event he took himself voluntarily to the police station to report the crime. Such actions have been held to represent contrition. He has satisfied the parole board in this respect.
As a lawyer myself, I have enormous respect for John’s achievements since then, despite disagreeing with him violently on several subjects!

By: Autonomous Mind

Autonomous Mind — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:14:52 +0000

Speaking as someone who aggressively advocates protection of the rights of the individual, I disagree with the campaign to give prison inmates the vote. I have set out my reasoning in my blog post on the subject, but the thrust is this is not a human rights issue – to me this is the latest example of entitlements being re-designated as rights. I would welcome the thoughts of others on the matter.

http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2010/02/08/prisoner-vote-ban-is-not-a-human-rights-issue/

By: The Slogger

The Slogger — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:06:10 +0000

I’m afraid I’ll have to strike a note of strong opposition re this one. We all have our views and angles, and this is mine: there never has been (and I hope never will be) any such thing as a ‘universal suffrage’. The only two criteria worth applying to the ‘right’ to vote are competence and citizenship. Both strike me as entirely practical and fair.
As to competence, we do not give the vote to the insane, mentally incompetent and socially immature. The current Government are keen to give the vote to 16 year-olds, but my own view is that age is a guide and no more. I’d give the vote to some eight year-olds, and take it off a lot of bankers I’ve met. (Ask 25 year olds whether they’d give the vote to 16 year-olds, and you’d be surprised how few would).
Regarding citizenship, ghastly foreign persons should of course not be allowed to vote, but I remain a fan of the Roman concept of earned citizenship. Although this is not legal now, I would remove all rights of citizenship from those incarcerated for breaking the law. Will Self (whom I admire immensely) would give all criminals the vote….which suggests to me he doesn’t understand the right to vote as something one should earn.
This issue has caused more thrown crockery and lost friendships for me over the years than all others put together. I still don’t really know why: everyone with a brain agrees we need criteria, so all we’re doing is arguing about where the lines are drawn.
My lines are very clear: if people take sod-all interest in their community affairs, or behave dysfunctionally in that community, or take their clothes off in inappropriate situations before weeing into the nearest policeman’s helmet….perhaps you catch my drift.
Why does anyone have the RIGHT to vote? If people don’t use their vote, it seems to me they are making a perfectly rational decision – especially in the current lunatic asylum some of us have to share. The ‘right’ to vote is neither binding nor universal: it is something to be earned or eschewed, as individuals see fit.
So there.

By: anon

anon — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:04:03 +0000

“I am told that what passes for social security here is truly hard to get for anyone. Hence Sangatte. The French are quite prepared to give them all asylum here – they don’t want it!”

I can honestly say that I’ve never even heard the slightest hint of this in the blogosphere, let alone the MSM (for all their faux coverage of the subject).

No doubt this is, at least in part, down to the limited range of my travels, but thanks a bunch Mrs/Miss R.

By: Anon 00:32

Anon 00:32 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:13:57 +0000

“to encourage those with learning disabilities to vote”

I think they have voted in the past 3 general elections. Some of them occupy the Labour front benches too.

I’ll get my coat ……

By: Anna Raccoon

Anna Raccoon — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:17:48 +0000

Yup, and I get health benefit from them, but there is an additional charge towards the health service deficit which is paid by anyone in receipt of, etc, etc, To qualify for a pension you have to have worked here, rather than have an income here.
I only got health benefit when my state pension became payable, until then I paid a very healthy amount each year to the French government for my health cover. Plus the additional charge!
Without a state pension and if you have lived here for less than five years, you are not entitled to even enter the French health service unless you are working here – I only just scraped in by the skin of my teeth. Early retirees have to pay an exhorbitant amount to private health insurance schemes.
Even French citizens can’t get ‘dole’ money unless they have worked and paid into the system for I think it is either three or five years. I am told that what passes for social security here is truly hard to get for anyone.
Hence Sangatte. The French are quite prepared to give them all asylum here – they don’t want it!

By: Saul

Saul — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:50:22 +0000

I presume you have an E101 form.

By: Saul

Saul — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:48:03 +0000

If you are paying tax in France then you may qualify for benefits from them. Pension, health etc.

By: Anna Raccoon

Anna Raccoon — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:44:06 +0000

Indeed Saul, what I pay to the British government is deducted from what I pay to the French government – but then because I am in receipt of a pension taxed in the UK, I also get to pay an additional health charge in France…..
You can play the same game with a coin I believe, just toss it up in the air…

By: Saul

Saul — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:38:42 +0000

The UK has tax treaties with most EU countries. It may be possible(depending on the rate you pay) to get a rebate.

By: Anna Raccoon

Anna Raccoon — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:36:51 +0000

Biffo,

Unfortuantely some Government pensions are taxed at source and there is no way of arranging them otherwise, regardless of where your place of domicile is. I suppose it means the government pay out less initiaaly since they reserve that part which they consider to be their right!

I also have to do a French tax return for that income which is not the pesky Government pension, and pay French tax on that.

By: Biffo

Biffo — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:29:57 +0000

Ms Raccoon, none of my business really but could you not change your place of domicile & then pay French tax rather than English – assuming it’s less of course? My son lives in an EU country & pays tax there – not a penny to Britain – though he did go there via Canada which may make a difference.