On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 13:30:47 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , T i m
wrote:

[snip]

But I'm not 'not bothering', I will bother to attend my local polling
station, offer up my card, take my paper, go into the booth and write
'SPOILED' across it, so that if anyone does read it they will realise
that it was spoiled intentionally, I didn't just make a mistake (by
putting a cross in both or neither etc).

Doing this is useful feedback to the political class, actually. As is
the fact that voting is not compulsory, meaning that we get to see the
proportion of people who feel voting in one election or another is a
waste of time.

That was the idea and at least I can't be accused of 'not bothering'.

Westminster election turnout has dropped over the last couple of
decades. I take that to mean that people have - correctly - deduced
that our Parliament has become less relevant.

Yup. Look at the turnouts where real black / white choices are
available, where a vote really counts for something positive for the
majority (like survival).

Hopefully that will
reverse once we leave the EU.

So, we have people saying that 'we' are governed by 'un elected
bureaucrats yet I hear someone else explaining for any new law or
ruling to be put into action, many countries and especially the ones
it impacts the most have to agree to it? No agreement, no change.

Is that not true and if you think it isn't, can you prove it isn't?

Cheers, T i m