Second home voters - why they matter
To its credit, Cornwall Council has compiled a register of properties whose owners seek a discount on their council tax because it is not their principle place of residence.
This document is secret and I'm trying to find out why. Clearly, it has the potential to be something of a "burglars' charter" but it is also a valuable political campaign tool. Since it was researched and written at public expense, I'm curious to know why it is not in the public domain.
Readers with long memories will recall the St Ives constituency Parliamentary election of 1987. Now, I'm all in favour of inclusivity and making it easier for people to vote, but in St Ives that year quite a few people apparently made it to the polling station despite the considerable handicap of being dead.
What had happened was that well organised political activists had harvested the proxy votes of elderly residents in nursing homes. Clearly, they were alive when they signed over their proxy votes. But they were dead by polling day.
The council's register of second homes should make it possible to disqualify, or at least question, people seeking to cast general election votes from those addresses. But for local elections the law is far less demanding - it is possible to vote in council elections wherever you are on the electoral register.
So in local council by-elections, where the turnout is low, and postal votes can play a significant role, there must be a temptation to harvest the potential of the second home owner. As the government seems in no hurry to address this issue, it seems only fair that the information should be freely available to all election candidates, and not just those rich enough to organise detailed campaigns.
I have asked the council for further details about why the register of second homes is "not a public document." A balance between "right to know" and "data protection?" This might be one for the Information Commissioner.
I'm ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Radio Devon’s Graham Smith, blogging on news, views and some fresh insights into West Country life, particularly the way government works locally and nationally.
Comment number 1.
At 24th Feb 2011, Dave the rave wrote:It's very unfair to compare second home voters, who, if registered properly, are legally entitled to vote in an area, with "political activists" who cheated in an election Graham.
We have no idea, no facts and figures to show that ANY second home voter voted illegally, nor any proof that,,if any did, it was done in anything other than error.
I suppose demonising second home owner does give some here a rallying call, and draws attention to your blog. But really. Creating a villain class out of second home owners, for just being so fortunate as to be able to afford a place in our county, is a bit rich to say the least.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 24th Feb 2011, P_Trembath wrote:Dave the rave wrote:-
"It's very unfair to compare second home voters, who, if registered properly, are legally entitled to vote in an area, with "political activists" who cheated in an election Graham."
He was pointing out that"political activists" could use second "home" owners for their own ends, not comparing them.
Dave the rave wrote:-
"We have no idea, no facts and figures to show that ANY second home voter voted illegally, nor any proof that,,if any did, it was done in anything other than error."
There are many crimes of which we are unaware, until they are investigated.
Dave the rave wrote:-
"I suppose demonising second home owner does give some here a rallying call, and draws attention to your blog. But really. Creating a villain class out of second home owners, for just being so fortunate as to be able to afford a place in our county, is a bit rich to say the least."
Owning a residential property for spending a few weeks a year holidaying in it, whilst there are local people (people living and working locally) who are homeless because they can not afford the inflated prices of housing, inflated due to people, with more money, from elsewhere, just wishing to holiday there, is as anti social as speeding and drunk driving. Those that do it see no wrong in it, those that suffer from its effects, do.
Second "home" owners are already a "villain class", no-one has to create one for them.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 24th Feb 2011, Dave the rave wrote:I find it odd, to say the least, that you claim people are "people living and working locally", and yet are homeless. Do you have any links or figures to back up your assertions P Trembath?
Of course, should this situation exist, and I do not doubt there may be one or two instances of it, hasn't this always been the case.
Hasn't accommodation for low income earners always been the reserve of the local council and private land lords?
TO say these people are homeless due to second home owners is a great exaggeration, to focus on one group as responsible for the earning levels and rental ability of another is disingenuous at best, a nasty slur at worse.
Could we not blame the council here for its failure to provide low cost housing for low income earners?
Could we not blame local landlords for preferring to rent out their properties for holiday makers rather than long term residents?
Of course we could, but there are a small vociferous group in Cornwall who wish to blame anyone other than the Cornish themselves.
They will never blame the Cornish for inflated house prices, they will never blame the Cornish for selling homes in the county to second home buyers.
The Cornish themselves are never to be blamed.
You'll find that there are far more holiday homes that are rented out to holiday makers than there are second homes.
Look at these people for instance;
"Choose from a huge range of self-catering accommodation throughout Cornwall. With both traditional and contemporary cottages and many available to rent for short stays, weekend breaks and longer holidays. For holiday accommodation the duchy is well served, with many holiday cottages in Cornwall. "
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 2nd Mar 2011, AccurateChronometer wrote:Number of residential houses in Cornwall & Scilly misappropriated for non-residential purposes by non-residents: circa 16,000
Number of people on Cornwall & Scilly housing waiting list: circa 16,000
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 3rd Mar 2011, Dave the rave wrote:"Circa" = a number I just made up.
Here's another fact; 93% of houses misappropriated for non-residential purposes by non-residents, were actually houses turned into holiday homes for rental to the English by Cornish residents.
Anyone can make up figures AC, I'll give yours credence when you provide some evidence to back up your claims.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)