Small election in Westminster, not many people voted

Liberal Democrat Hereditary Peers’ By-election, January 2005: Result

In the by-election to replace the late Earl Russell, all four of the eligible Liberal Democrat hereditary peers cast valid votes. The successful candidate was the 10th Earl of Glasgow, who received all four first-preference votes.

The full list of candidates was as follows:

  • 13th Earl of Carlisle
  • 10th Earl of Glasgow
  • 2nd Lord Kennet

Four Liberal Democrat hereditary peers (6th Lord Addington, 4th Lord Avebury, 15th Viscount Falkland and 7th Lord Methuen) were eligible to vote.

The poll was conducted with the assistance of Electoral Reform Services.

Ages of candidates: 55, also 55, and 81.
Ages of voters: 41, 76, 69 and 73.

Isn’t democracy wonderful?

This entry was posted in Uncategorised. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Small election in Westminster, not many people voted

  1. pnh says:

    I don’t have anything like your detailed knowledge of Irish politics, but I was struck by your reaction to being rated as a hard-line Green. I’ve taken several such online surveys over the years, and the European ones–whether built around the politics of a single country or simple EU-wide in their scope–always seem to tell me I should vote for some Green party or another. There are a few countries in which I can imagine doing so, because the local Greens have actually gotten their act together, but in most countries I suspect that my position would be much like yours.

    I realize your reaction is based on very specific recent Irish history and mine is based on not much more than the impressions built up over many years of following the news, but I’m kind of struck by the parallel. I think I probably read to these surveys as a big Green supporter because I think that climate change is a big deal and because when given the opportunity to rank which subjects are important to me, I frequently put a large emphasis on issues like public transit and sustainable urban development. But every time I deal with self-described Greens I find myself put off by a whole constellation of moralizing attitudes that seem to travel alongside the stuff I agree with. I’d like a pro-science, pro-sustainability political movement whose position is that we have to deal with climate change and put our technological civilization on a more sustainable basis so that we can go ahead and be, as individuals, every bit as crappy as we are. Too many actual existing Greens seem to believe, as an unquestioned article of faith, that success can’t and won’t happen without large numbers of people successfully becoming more individually virtuous. I think that such an outlook isn’t politics, it’s millenarianism–not a plan, but a dream.

Comments are closed.