Low turn out and negative response mar region's Police and Crime Commissioner elections

5:10am Friday 16th November 2012 in News By Joanna Morris

Polling station at Haughton Children's Centre, in Darlington Polling station at Haughton Children's Centre, in Darlington

POLLING STATIONS were left sparsely populated as confusion reigned supreme over the Police and Crime Commissioner elections yesterday.

For results as they're announced, click here

The Electoral Reform Society had previously predicted the election would attract the lowest ever turnout during peacetime, with estimations of national turnout standing at 18.5 per cent last night.

The mood of the region on polling day seemed to reflect this belief.

Straw polls conducted by The Northern Echo revealed a largely negative response to the elections, with many voters saying an overall lack of information had marred the election process.

Despite the post of Police and Crime Commissioner being non-political, voting appeared to be largely along party lines, with many voters interviewed unable to name the candidate they had chosen.

Turnout across the region appeared to be slow throughout the day. By 1pm, many polling stations in York had reported single-figure turnouts.

A spokeswoman for Hambleton and Richmondshire District Council said: “Generally speaking, it’s very quiet.

It’s been very slow across the district.”

In Teesside, three out of six polling stations visited were empty. By mid-morning, only 15 people had voted at the Central library in Thornaby, near Stockton.

Pat McKie, of Thornaby, said: “I voted for Labour because that’s who I always vote for.

“I don’t really know who the candidate is and we did not have enough information through the door about policies.

I don’t think I have been able to give a fair vote.”

Polling stations across north Durham reported a “trickle” of voters , with the number of postal ballots also down on previous years.

At one polling station in Darlington, there were about 45 voters between 7am and 2.20pm.

Darlington resident Susan Boyle, 63, said: “I don’t think there will be a big turnout. It probably is a waste of money.

To me, the candidate’s political party is irrelevant – it should be about what they want to get done.”

Katie Ghose, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society, called the election “a comedy of errors”.

She added: “Polling stations are standing empty because voters knew next to nothing about the role, let alone the candidates they were expected to pick from “There have been avoidable errors at every step, and those responsible should be held to account.”

Comments(52)

Idontknowaboutyoubut says...
8:51pm Thu 15 Nov 12

If the wrong candidate wins,which is possible,the good people of Durham,who couldnt be bothered to vote,will be no doubt up in arms when they find G4S running Police Services.I really do not understand the negative attitude of the electorate towards exercising their democratic right to vote.How would you feel if the rights were taken away?

Report this post »

darlomoor says...
9:42pm Thu 15 Nov 12

People are not voting because they don't agree with these 41 non-jobs for the boys at high salaries and pensions when the country can't afford this. Most people will not vote to voice their displeasure and the usual political hacks will twist this to say it's because they are apathethic. To go against this I went out of my way to do a spoilt paper. Let's see if they report the number of spoilt papers.

Report this post »

darlomoor says...
9:42pm Thu 15 Nov 12

People are not voting because they don't agree with these 41 non-jobs for the boys at high salaries and pensions when the country can't afford this. Most people will not vote to voice their displeasure and the usual political hacks will twist this to say it's because they are apathethic. To go against this I went out of my way to do a spoilt paper. Let's see if they report the number of spoilt papers.

Report this post »

joeninety says...
9:46pm Thu 15 Nov 12

The main reason for the negative attitude is solely down to the lack of any correspondence about the election. As stated, nobody knew who the candidates were or what they intended doing if elected. Hence total dis-interest.
Not everyone has a computer and should not have to ring up to find information, it should have been provided with the polling cards.

Report this post »

Bessford says...
10:08pm Thu 15 Nov 12

I know of one MP who went into a Sheltered Court at 6pm tonight going into old ladies flats and helping them to decide who to vote for.when they said they did not understand any of it, he even put the cross beside the person he had told them was the best for the job. Then he took their ballot papers to the staion for them.
Legal, maybe
Correct for this Labour MP NO

Report this post »

jameshitch says...
10:30pm Thu 15 Nov 12

I would have voted today, but as I still have not received any information on either the candidates or how and where to vote, I have been unable to do so. Not happy! No information whatsoever

Report this post »

Jolly Roger says...
10:53pm Thu 15 Nov 12

Well if the people who have not voted don't like what the winners do - well tough because you lot could not care less.

I voted because I hope the person I voted for wins and does a good job

Report this post »

joeninety says...
11:01pm Thu 15 Nov 12

Jolly Roger wrote:
Well if the people who have not voted don't like what the winners do - well tough because you lot could not care less.

I voted because I hope the person I voted for wins and does a good job
May I ask how you knew who to vote for????
I have voted in every General Election and every Council Election because I could read the correspondence concerning the candidates. For this election I have only received my polling card; so hence know nothing about the candidates.

Report this post »

John Justice says...
11:18pm Thu 15 Nov 12

This election has been badly handled by the government and the projected low turn out will be an embarrasment for both the government and those elected to the post. How can any "winner" comfortably think he or she has a mandate from the community following what is likely to be an historic low turn out?. When I went to vote at my Polling station there were six staff in the room, possibly more than actual voters. Why has DCC staffed up some polling stations with so many staff that costs far outweigh the actual voting costs.?.

Report this post »

Becca. says...
11:21pm Thu 15 Nov 12

People have been offered little or no information on the candidates, so why would we vote when we have been so ill-informed about the people we are supposed to be voting for? Also, I completely disagree with the use of schools as polling stations - what is wrong with using community centers, leisure centers or other such places? My daughter's routine has been disrupted for this, which isn't all that bad but it is a difficult thing for a child who is autistic (for example) to have their routine disturbed.

Report this post »

AndyAsh says...
11:50pm Thu 15 Nov 12

I personally had no interest in voting because I don't understand the point of these roles. What will they do? If they are representing the public how will we contact them? I know how to contact my local bobby, isn't that all that matters. Not some well paid individual who looks after the whole force area (in my case from Berwick to Sunderland).

Report this post »

spragger says...
12:00am Fri 16 Nov 12

It is a good thing those eejits cannot be bothered to place an X.

We could have ended up with the wrong PCC

Report this post »

Hunty1 says...
12:10am Fri 16 Nov 12

What a complete waste of time, it needs to be re done and this time more than two weeks notice as to who is up for election!

Report this post »

Graeme_r says...
12:27am Fri 16 Nov 12

Bessford wrote:
I know of one MP who went into a Sheltered Court at 6pm tonight going into old ladies flats and helping them to decide who to vote for.when they said they did not understand any of it, he even put the cross beside the person he had told them was the best for the job. Then he took their ballot papers to the staion for them.
Legal, maybe
Correct for this Labour MP NO
He could only take postal votes to a Polling station but if this is true, the Electoral Commission and the returning Officer should be informed. Only the person to whom the ballot papers is assigned can legally mark them unless they appointed someone else to act as proxy voter or seek assistance from Polling station staff.

Report this post »

hutchy2570 says...
8:01am Fri 16 Nov 12

It's not confusion, it's just that there was no "lesser of two evils" to choose from. All of the candidates in the Durham area were as rubbish as each other!

Report this post »

johnty says...
8:33am Fri 16 Nov 12

I MAY HAVE VOTED TODAY, BUT I WILL NOT PUT MY NAME TO ANY VOTE THAT I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE CANDIDATES WE HAVE HAD NO INFO ABOUT ANYOINE EXCEPT WHAT IS IN YOUR NORTHERN ECHO TODAY SORRY BUT IF THEY KNEW NOTHING OF ME THEY WOULD VOTE FOR ME EITHER

Report this post »

swissball says...
9:19am Fri 16 Nov 12

Same as many of the contributors to this post, complete lack of information of information about the candidates we're supposed to be voting for - therefore I haven't voted!!

Report this post »

RobAycliffe says...
9:34am Fri 16 Nov 12

All the candidates' election statements are here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-195
10224

It takes about 30 seconds to find this, if you know how to use Google. I can't understand the numpties who are complaining about lack of information.

Sure, if you don't have internet access you have to rely on traditional media but that doesn't apply to anyone here, does it?

It's a worry when supposed adults need their hands holding to such an extent. Perhaps it's as well that these poor lost lambs didn't vote.

Jameshitch - The polling station is indicated on your polling card, as ever. You do have a polling card don't you?

Report this post »

Catherinet says...
10:06am Fri 16 Nov 12

I didn't vote because after looking at the candidates online I didn't like the look of any of them. Two of them should be behind bars themselves. If there had been a RON option I would have chosen it.

Report this post »

swissball says...
10:09am Fri 16 Nov 12

joeninety wrote:
The main reason for the negative attitude is solely down to the lack of any correspondence about the election. As stated, nobody knew who the candidates were or what they intended doing if elected. Hence total dis-interest.
Not everyone has a computer and should not have to ring up to find information, it should have been provided with the polling cards.
totally agree!

As for the numpty from Aycliffe, not everybody has access to the internet, and why should people chase after information about the candidates, shouldn't it have the other way round been their duty to chase the voter!
Or was it just voter apathy, look that one up on google you moron!!!!!

Report this post »

RobAycliffe says...
10:27am Fri 16 Nov 12

Swissball - Did you read my post or are you lacking simple comprehension skills? Which of the commenters here does not have access to the internet?

"...why should people chase after information..." - pathetic. Do you always need to be spoonfed?

Voting is a right and a responsibility. I'm glad that apathetic types such as yourself don't vote.

Report this post »

jude666 says...
10:52am Fri 16 Nov 12

This appear to me to be just another high-salaried pretend job for another ex-copper who wants to get out of the rat race. The police need to focus on what they are paid to do which at the moment is arresting innocent people and letting criminals off with a slap on the wrist. Why do we need to fund another position out of the public force. If they are useless and are not doing their job then sack them, simple.

Report this post »

Daza says...
11:22am Fri 16 Nov 12

Police and Crime commissioner to go along with a Chief Constable, an Assistant Chief Constable, a Deputy chief Constable!

In my estimations that's about 400k a year!

None of the above are getting cut to the bone like the bobby on the street are they!

And this sham Govt. says money needs to be saved?

Report this post »

nigelsafc says...
11:25am Fri 16 Nov 12

i voted for the only candidate that sent me his CV if the others couldn't be bothered to inform the public with their credentials then why would any one vote for them, if they wont spend any of there own money on trying to get their snouts in the trough.

Report this post »

nigelsafc says...
11:35am Fri 16 Nov 12

RobAycliffe wrote:
All the candidates' election statements are here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-england-195

10224

It takes about 30 seconds to find this, if you know how to use Google. I can't understand the numpties who are complaining about lack of information.

Sure, if you don't have internet access you have to rely on traditional media but that doesn't apply to anyone here, does it?

It's a worry when supposed adults need their hands holding to such an extent. Perhaps it's as well that these poor lost lambs didn't vote.

Jameshitch - The polling station is indicated on your polling card, as ever. You do have a polling card don't you?
i have two elderly relatives in their ninety's who have never missed a opportunity to vote in their lives until yesterday . when i asked them why they had not voted their reasons were simple they did not know who was standing.perhaps they should have invested in a computer or would it have been simpler if the people wishing to be elected could have cared about giving people some information in return for their vote. PS don't insult elderly people with insults Mr NUMPTY

Report this post »

RobAycliffe says...
11:49am Fri 16 Nov 12

OK nigelsafc. Since you seem to have the same poor comprehension skills as the other bloke, here are the subtitles for the hard of thinking:

1) There are people in this thread complaining that they could not vote because there is a "complete lack of information"

2) These complainers obviously have internet access

3) If you have internet access then there is an excess of information about the candidates available at a click

4) The numpties to which I refer are the complainers in this thread, such as yourself. Not the people without internet access, which I acknowledged in my original post if you had the wit to read it.

Report this post »

JessicaMary says...
12:14pm Fri 16 Nov 12

I'm just very curious about the Northern Echo's incentives were for supporting Kingsley Smith throughout this campaign? Would it be possible to have some form of response from someone who works there? I.e. how come Kingsley's name was frequently mentioned in articles? And more interestingly the article two days ago, how come Ron Hoggs name was NOT mentioned as one of the candidates? Just curious?

Report this post »

swissball says...
12:21pm Fri 16 Nov 12

RobAycliffe wrote:
OK nigelsafc. Since you seem to have the same poor comprehension skills as the other bloke, here are the subtitles for the hard of thinking:

1) There are people in this thread complaining that they could not vote because there is a "complete lack of information"

2) These complainers obviously have internet access

3) If you have internet access then there is an excess of information about the candidates available at a click

4) The numpties to which I refer are the complainers in this thread, such as yourself. Not the people without internet access, which I acknowledged in my original post if you had the wit to read it.
are you assuming I'm a "bloke"? you assume too much - best put the shovel down - buffoon LMAO

Report this post »

nigelsafc says...
1:02pm Fri 16 Nov 12

RobAycliffe wrote:
OK nigelsafc. Since you seem to have the same poor comprehension skills as the other bloke, here are the subtitles for the hard of thinking:

1) There are people in this thread complaining that they could not vote because there is a "complete lack of information"

2) These complainers obviously have internet access

3) If you have internet access then there is an excess of information about the candidates available at a click

4) The numpties to which I refer are the complainers in this thread, such as yourself. Not the people without internet access, which I acknowledged in my original post if you had the wit to read it.
i did have the opportunity to check the web to make my decision the point i made if you did not understand was that many people who don't have the internet ie the elderly they should not have to go looking for info for someone who is after a very well paid job when the candidates are trying to get the job on the cheap. i cant wait for the next general election to be excused the avalanche of literature as in your opinion we can all look on the internet to see who our next prime minister will be

Report this post »

QUAKERLADY says...
1:49pm Fri 16 Nov 12

I went on the internet and read up on the options and voted for Ron Hogg - mainly because he was the only one with any police officer experience, which I felt might be helpful in this job.
Its true a bit of information would have been helpful for those without internet access. I presume they would have had to fund these themselves and this is the reason we didnt get any.

Report this post »

RobAycliffe says...
1:58pm Fri 16 Nov 12

swissball wrote:
RobAycliffe wrote:
OK nigelsafc. Since you seem to have the same poor comprehension skills as the other bloke, here are the subtitles for the hard of thinking:

1) There are people in this thread complaining that they could not vote because there is a "complete lack of information"

2) These complainers obviously have internet access

3) If you have internet access then there is an excess of information about the candidates available at a click

4) The numpties to which I refer are the complainers in this thread, such as yourself. Not the people without internet access, which I acknowledged in my original post if you had the wit to read it.
are you assuming I'm a "bloke"? you assume too much - best put the shovel down - buffoon LMAO
Oh, yes I did assume you were a bloke. Humble apologies for that. It is very obvious from your gentle manners that you are in fact a lady.

A good day to you madam.

Report this post »

tonyducks says...
2:30pm Fri 16 Nov 12

I voted for the only one with any police experience (in Durham area), who thankfully also happened to be the Labour candidate. Though the importance and duties of these roles still seem ambiguous, possibly they could have spent the salaries of the successful candidate and the cost of the election as a whole into more deserving areas of the police budget. Or other areas of public interest that are sorely lacking (childcare facilities, arts facilities, Primary trust funds etc).

Report this post »

Dtonmaf says...
2:44pm Fri 16 Nov 12

Commissioner Gordon wasn't on the slip so I didn't vote! I know more about him than any of the others! And he aint real!

Report this post »

Edmondsley says...
3:13pm Fri 16 Nov 12

I did have plenty of information about the candidates. I attended a public meeting. After all this my conclusion was none of them were worth my vote. I dont want a police commisioner who represents a political party. I want one who represents the public in his police area. I understand this exercise has cost this country £56 million . Good job we are not desprerate for money then!!.

Report this post »

barnardcastle says...
3:18pm Fri 16 Nov 12

QUAKERLADY wrote:
I went on the internet and read up on the options and voted for Ron Hogg - mainly because he was the only one with any police officer experience, which I felt might be helpful in this job.
Its true a bit of information would have been helpful for those without internet access. I presume they would have had to fund these themselves and this is the reason we didnt get any.
We don't want someone with police experience - we NEED someone who is interested in citizens and how the police serve the area - not someone who will empathise with the police - we need someone who is more interested in our needs from the police and less interested in "understanding" the police.

Report this post »

judygone says...
4:11pm Fri 16 Nov 12

I never voted because i think this was all a waste of time and money, jobs for the boys etc. Most of the country were not bothered ,or for this. I also think out of those who voted , voted for the political party and not the person. Politics should be kept out of jobs like this.

Report this post »

bob the knob says...
5:04pm Fri 16 Nov 12

who give a toss who won , there all in it for money and perks aledgedley

Report this post »

MSG says...
5:28pm Fri 16 Nov 12

Poor candidates, no info, what a load of crap!

Report this post »

loonyleft says...
5:29pm Fri 16 Nov 12

police and crime is the concern of politics every thing people do, there is politics involved,you cannot seperate politics out of your life no matter how you try,even somebody who is not active in politics have their own political view.

Report this post »

RobAycliffe says...
5:40pm Fri 16 Nov 12

Loonyleft - I think what people mean is 'Party Politics' should be kept out of it, rather than politics in general.

There is a tendency for people to identify with a party and then follow the party line in an unthinking way, or even not be fully aware of what that party stands for. (And I'm not just referring to Labour).

Report this post »

johnny_p says...
6:16pm Fri 16 Nov 12

"Pat McKie, of Thornaby, said: “I voted for Labour because that’s who I always vote for.

“I don’t really know who the candidate is and we did not have enough information through the door about policies."

Says it all really.......

Report this post »

Birdyy says...
6:26pm Fri 16 Nov 12

Apathy was my reason for not voting.

First time for everything........

Report this post »

Birdyy says...
6:29pm Fri 16 Nov 12

It is not to late to vote. HM e-petition is available here:

https://submissions.
epetitions.direct.go
v.uk/petitions/41806

Report this post »

Homshaw1 says...
9:14pm Fri 16 Nov 12

Would it not be more worthwhile to vote for who served as a magistrate than who got some job designed as a nice little earner for someone with the right connections? We might get rid of ludicrously lenient sentences which serve as no deterent?

As for voting for politicians? What good does it do? They seem to do nothing other than look after themselves and have free reign to fiddle their expenses without any sanctions.

I voted Liberal Democrat at the last election because I thought the increase intuition fees was bad for the young people and bad for the economy.

Just about the first thing Nick Clegg did was sell his principals down the river for a whiff of power.

I refuse to vote because it gives credibility to a bunch of "self serving", arrogant morans.

Report this post »

Spy Boy says...
10:22pm Fri 16 Nov 12

A total waste of time and £100,000,000 of our money. And now it's going to cost us between £60,000 and £100,000 each plus expenses to keep them in their cushy little numbers. Not enough info was available via our letterboxes. I had one leaflet for one of the wannabees. The polling station was empty apart from me and three staff peering out from behind a mound of blank forms.

It's just another political jolly for another bunch oif suits. They win and we pay the price in both loss of service from the overstretched Police force and money. Very few of the candidates seem to have the tiniest bit of experience. Political has beens looking for a place at the trough.

Looking at results it would seem that the winners have been voted in on about 5% of the possible vote. This is not democracy as I know it, though it is a good example of the apathy that is ruling our lives. These clowns are using your apathy against you. If you don't know who to vote for, go on-line and have a look. It's not hard in these days of iPhones and internet access.

Report this post »

jack114 says...
9:35am Sat 17 Nov 12

Apparently this farcical exercise would have paid for 3000 police officers .

Report this post »

Becca. says...
11:18am Sat 17 Nov 12

I have internet access and am perfectly capable of searching for information on candidates - but if they cared about my vote they would have made the effort to ensure I had the information about them yet not one of the candidates did so.

Report this post »

vercingetorix says...
11:25am Sat 17 Nov 12

dont think will make any difference ....do we really need these people ?....by the way ....does anyone know why the James Allen murder trial wasnt reported on yesterday ???

Report this post »

Herorich says...
7:03pm Sat 17 Nov 12

There was no point in voting as it was political party candidates and the people of Darlington vote labour regardless of how bad a job they do or their policies. I bet many did not even know the name of the person, just simply that they were labour. Waste of time and money.

Report this post »

Cycling Scientist says...
4:09pm Mon 19 Nov 12

I got the card through my letter box as well. Neither I know what a "Police and Crime Commissioner" does, nor I had any idea about names and faces. So how should I have elected - pinning the voter's form to a door and using a dart arrow ? Sadly, with zero information given I felt not compenent to vote. Maybe, instead of voting for unknown names and faces, what's about voting for concepts ? The question for example, if certain police services should be privatised or not, would have been something I would have had an opinion about. Howay, at the end of the day - I am foreigner and probably at the polling station they would have told me I was not eligible to vote anyhow as it happened before as the organisers are not smart enough to save the rain forest by only sending the vote announcements out to folks who are eligible to vote at all ...

Report this post »

Lifetime Townie says...
8:54pm Mon 19 Nov 12

Why sould politics come into policing? Policing should be independant and without favour but I can see decisions being influenced in this office by Labour and its most certainly up to you Mr Hogg to demonstrate your independence to your public

Report this post »

Heat1969 says...
5:55pm Wed 21 Nov 12

I didn't even get a polling card never mind any information about any of the candidates, complete whitewash.

If my vote was so valuable then it should have been up to the candidate to come to me and not the other way round.

If I was applying for a new job I would go to the employer and would not expect the employer to come to me!!!

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree