With this sentence I am deliberately spoiling my ballot paper, as it is my right to do so.

Never has there been more of a need for a “none of the above” option as there is here, in this constituency, in this election. I have been denied my right to vote for political party of my choice and, subsequently, my right to vote against the unfair and archaic ‘First Past The Post’ system.

It’s early, so very early.

Tomorrow – or when the sun comes up anyway, as it is technically today – I will walk down to the polling station and deface my ballot paper.

I live in Buckingham, the constituency currently defended by The Rt. Hon. John Bercow, the former Conservative turned Speaker, and though I am certain that in his former years he was a wonderful constituency MP, I will not be voting for him.

There have, recently, been several moments where I have felt the need to contact my local MP, to try and get someone to stand up for what I believe in in the Palace of Westminster. Although it is often that Mr. Bercow has agreed in some respects with me, he is powerless do to anything. He cannot vote. The most he can do is forward my letter to ambivalent ministers on my behalf with a special header. The Speaker must remain impartial.

I see this as losing my vote. I will not have a say in the next Prime Minister, in the result of the election at all. Bercow will be, almost certainly, re-elected, and nothing will have changed. In my previous post I mentioned one of his competitors Nigel Farage, who clearly, in my opinion, is standing in the wrong area. There are a total of eleven candidates watering down the opposition vote, and none of them will retain their £500 deposit.

And thus, when I awake from this ever-nearing slumber, I will grab my phone to tweet about my entirely pointless journey to protest against First Past The Post by simultaneously voting and refusing to do so.

I’ve been given an unpaid job at Politics.co.uk reporting on the Election in my home town, unfortunately my first article was rejected, as it contained, in their eyes, too much opinion. I stand by it; as far as I can see everything is backed up by a quote, and I have photographs and audio recordings of everything. It seems all they want is a block of quotes, which is dull and uninteresting – analysis is where your ability is measured, not in collating a block of quotes from uninformed persons.

So anyway, here it is:

Yesterday, UKIP officially launched their Campaign for the seat of Buckingham. Nigel Farage, the flamboyant character pushing to oust the incumbent Speaker John Bercow, began his campaign in earnest – talking to constituents on the High Street and taking interviews from the press before moving to the nearby small town of Winslow, around seven miles south. Farage hopes to gain the seat as “Buckingham would then have a voice, as opposed to a speaker”; in having policies and opinions he effectively beats the Speaker, who can only contact Government departments and not vote on anything himself.
Winslow proved to be both thoroughly undecided, and empty. Of the five or so people Mr. Farage spoke to, only one was sure of his vote, and that was against the “waste of space” that is Farage. Two Pub landlords were spoken to in Farage’s attempt to visit every licensed premises in the constituency and despite his policy to reinstate smoking in Public Houses – in a specially designated room – neither seemed convinced, though they were grateful Farage was there to listen to their opinion and understand their worries. With as many as 52 Pubs closing each week after the smoking ban Farage wants to boost business for licensees, seeing “Every Pub as a Parliament” where local views are discussed and debated: it is a shameful irony that when we visited, few people even wanted to get involved with the press-troupe that haunted the candidate’s every step. Upon returning to Buckingham, one more pub was visited, used just briefly for a televised interview.
As the evening drew near the party prepared for an eventful debate, introducing themselves to potential voters and supporters, and though the audience was littered with UKIP members and supporters, the overall atmosphere was one of subtle pessimism: even if UKIP had the policies, how would they put them into practice with so few seats. In attendance was the Sunday Telegraph’s Christopher Booker, who held the microphone – or rather shouted – for forty minutes on his support for UKIP. Oddly, his speech was heavily biased towards his own controversial scientific views, particularly those regarding global warming, claiming that UKIP are also “climate sceptics” and he supports them for that – drawing parallels with the only other party to take such a stance: the BNP. He claimed that the Climate Change Act, passed by the EU, was “ridiculous” and downplayed the effects of carbon dioxide, sarcastically calling it harmful as “we’re all breathing [it] out and every plant in the world needs [it] to live”. Taking the opportunity, he plugged his book: The Real Global Warming Disaster. Rather distracting from the real points of the national deficit, immigration and cost-cutting. Besides, in affluent middle-england where the choice between expensive ‘green’ energy and cost-cutting fossil fuels is an open one, and recycling is at the forefront of this countryside landscape, maybe this was not the best of locations to try and hit this point home.
Farage was preceded by the party’s new leader: Lord Pearson, taking the post after Farage abdicated to spend more time on his Westminster career. Answering questions from the public, the candidate seemed confident in all his policies, including the controversial banning of burkas in public buildings, citing security risks. All in all, it was clear Farage’s primary aim was to cause an “earthquake” in Westminster, and that by removing the Speaker, Parliament would again be reformed in earnest. Straight talking to the end, he finished clearly: “what you see with me, is what you get”, “[in this constituency] we’re voting for individuals”.