to think that people turned away from voting should have got down there earlier?

[aloevera]

They've had all day. Or could have done a postal vote? Or am I too harsh?

ChippyMinton: these laws were not handed down on high from God. If they lead to patently unfair results, then they clearly need to be changed. I suggested one potential means of being lenient that would pose no security risk at all. Judging by your answers, you clearly think that to the extent that all is not rosy in the garden, it's the fault of the voters for having the temerity to show up at, say, 9.30. That is self-evidently stupid. If the polls are open from 7 till 10, then people are quite right to assume that turning up at 9.30 or 9.45 (never mind 8.30) is an OK thing to do. Otherwise, the poll cards need to say "Doors close at 8.30. Last ballot papers are handed out at 10."

You seem cross that no-one has expressed gratitude to the volunteers for doing the work. That's because people tend to care more about outcomes than the effort that goes in. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking I'd rather pay for a few more professionals if it made it possible to have a smoother running system.

On a separate note, I'll bet this leads to calls for computer-based voting, which will be even more depressing, because the problems here were all to do with the process for getting into the voting booth, not what happened once people were in there. And that process will not be improved one jot by computer-based voting, unless we move to remote voting with the massively enlarged risk of widescale voterigging that that entails.

MrsTittlemouse - you can complain to the electorial commission. Will try to find contact details.

Complain here.

why not just say that you can't release exit polls until all votes are cast? The electoral commission can formally declare voting at an end when it is at an end.
why let the media desire for exit polls govern our electoral process?

if you are in the line at 10pm you should be entitled to vote.

Heehee, they make me cross on saturdays in town too!

Shoot me

Did anyone else have to use a pencil to vote? I hope the counters were checked for rubbers on entry

The one problem that no-one has made clear here is that when you go into the polling station, they cross your name off the register, and only then hand you your ballot papers and let you go into the booths to vote.

There could be as many booths as you like, but it's the one register that is the issue. The whole queue of people is slowed because there is only one register.

If it was computerised then this would stop this bottle-neck - but the cost of this would, presumably, be massive.

As a small example of the kind of thing they could do to speed up the process, they could have used a searchable database of voters' names to do the registration process, instead of a paper-based exercise. I'm sure there's a dozen other things they could also have done

That's not true BIAWG (or at least not where I voted). They split the register depending on your address. You queued in the line for your street and that's where your name was crossed off. There were 2 queues when I went to vote in the morning but my dad said there were 4 when he went in the evening. All very clear where to go.

Actually there were four registers at my polling station, for different streets or surnames, I forget. I went in at 9pm, and why shouldn't I? (No queue, by the way, only one other voter there at the time). If advertised hours are 7am-10pm why on earth should anyone feel they have to go in early in the day or they will miss their chance?

SAHMs clogging up the aisles during my lunchtime/at the weekend are another matter entirely. They should be banned from shops between midday and two. And Saturdays. Bloody hell, they have all week to piss about in Waitrose with their ginormoprams and then have the nerve to want to shop when I do

I don't see why the cost of computerising the registration would be massive. It just requires taking a few laptops along with the electoral roll on each one. As you say, BecauseIAgreeWithGordon, it's the registration that's the bottleneck. In the polling station where I voted this morning, the process was completely bonkers and inefficient. There were 2 registration desks, divided by where people lived. Each desk was staffed by two people one checked the register and the other handed out the cards. There was no reason why all four could not have been doing both jobs it would have virtually doubled the throughput of each desk.

There was also only 1 queue for the two desks. That would make sense if the person at the head of the queue just went to the next available desk, like in a queue for a teller at a bank, but it makes no sense when you have to go to one desk or the other. The result was confusion and another volunteer who spent their time guiding people between the desks.

That was aimed at foureleven btw.

yabu

Some people work shifts, and some people are carers and it might be the first opportunity.

That's why the polling station is supposed to be open until 10pm. It's not just for the look of it - it's for the people who can't do 5.30 to 7.30 like all the office staff can. Don't be so blinkered

Otterinaskode, I dont get it..?

Is that your opinion?

or are you being sarcastic?

People were queueing for up to three hours. And why shouldn't you be able to turn up at 9.30pm and expect to be able to vote? Otherwise they need to specify last admittance at 9pm, all votes to be cast by 10pm.

Postal votes are rife for corruption, I would always choose to vote in person if physically able to.

"that voter turnout was unusually high, and queues were building up in some areas"

Not sure what the BBC meant when they said "voting is brisk" at various times yesterday.

My immediate thought was "they're seeing people go in, and come out, in a matter of minutes", ie as per previous election polls.

Someone mentioned on Twitter that the polling station was quite busy (as she was on her way into work at the BBC around lunchtime).

Of course, what one person 'broadcast' via Twitter does not guarantee to be mentioned (and as she was presumably in London) may not be matched elsewhere, so could easily be ignored.

I don't follow people on Twitter, but this was Martha Kearney's comments, with some later comments around 19:00 being reported on the Guardian's site, claiming she would be in trouble as her comments broke BBC policy on not 'broadcasting' comments (hers were from some political insiders with their views).

slhilly - there would be rather more to computerise voting than 'taking a few laptops down the polling station'.

And if the problems people have checking in for appointments on a screen at my doctors surgery are anything to go by, voting would take a darn site longer than it does now.

The area with the sudents comment is Sheffield I believe. The new big student village is in theat ward. These are the students they are saying all turned up withut polling cards, delaying things, etc. But if the rules are you don't need polling cards or ID then people can't be blamed for not bringing them.

Someone has asked if we can have time off to vote on the thread. I don't think people in the UK get that as an option.

I know of someone from work who did not get to vote. She queued for 45 minutes and was then turned away. She was in the building at the time - initially they were told to go in the building and they;d be able to vote. Then they changed their minds and said they couldn't. Apparently there was some unrest and the policce were called to disperse crowds.

If you work and commute then you don't get 15 hours to vote, you get, realistically, around four - between 6pm and 10pm. That should be enough so that you don't have to register for a postal vote if you don't want to.
But in some polling stations there weren't enough registration desks to manage the demand, and queues built up. If all the evening voters had turned up promptly at 6pm they would still have had to turn people away at 10pm.
The dithery woman on the news who went away and came back three times in search of a better queue would have got to vote if she'd just stuck at it the first time, but the slot she took would have meant someone else being turned away, and that is not acceptable.

I blame the Government - oops we have no Government

There are approximately 45 million people who are registered to vote in parliamentary elections in this country, and more who are registered to vote at local council elections. Regardless of the 'expected' turnout, there should be enough ballot papers and staff at each polling station, to allow for the fact that there might be 100% turnout. At our polling station, there were fewer polling clerks than usual and fewer polling booths as well. When I went at 6.45pm, there was a queue, something I have never experienced in any election before.

I have voted in every election since 1983 and have acted as poll clerk several times. I have never seen our local polling station so disorganized as it was yesterday.

I think we need to allow that anyone who is in the queue at 10:00pm, should be allowed to vote, however long it takes for the person at the back of the queue to reach the front and cast their ballot.

As for student with no cards, I have never taken my polling card to vote, it clearly states you do not need it. I am pleased that students are motivated enough to want to vote. My own DCs opted for a postal vote so they could still vote for here rather than where they are at university, but many students prefer to vote in the area where they are studying.

Eurgh, I am having an argument (via FB) with a friend of a friend who is an arrogant arse and basically believes that if you had to queue to vote it's your own stupid fault for being thick (not spending your whole working day arsing about reading political updates at work) and you deserve everythign you get for not going down at 7am. He's really getting on my wick, I must stop engaging with him...

I'm afraid that if someone is that stubborn bint you arent going to convince them.