The election when 18,107 people signed one candidate’s nomination papers
Welcome to the 1950 general election and the Bury St Edmunds constituency. The Conservative candidate, William Aitken (nephew of Lord Beaverbrook and father of disgraced Conservative MP Jonathan Aitken), gathered 18,107 signatures on his nomination papers. Only 10 were required.
When it came to polling day, he secured 22,559 votes – a healthy margin of victory and also only a small margin beyond the nomination signature tally.
This is an extreme example of something that used to be common: having a large number of nomination signatures as a show of strength and making a fuss over their submission.
With political parties now looking at other ways of engaging supporters beyond their ranks of formal members, perhaps we’ll see someone pick up the idea of developing a wider network of supporters who publicly nominate a party’s candidates and a result start to have a closer connection to and involvement with the party even if they feel formal membership is a step too far. Getting people to agree to nominate a candidate would also be an interesting twist on accumulating a collection of voter pledges.
Maltese footnote
Aficionados of Liberal Democrat leadership hustings will also be pleased to note that William Aitken was a member of the 1955 round-table on Malta‘s constitution. This led to the proposals that Malta be represented by three MPs in the Westminster House of Commons. Despite being supported by 77% of voters in a referendum the following year, this package of reforms fizzled out without being enacted.
It would be interesting to have signing nomination paper as also casting a vote so can’t vote later.
interesting thought Mike.
I remember this happening somewhere when I first voted, but when, as a candidate, I suggested reviving it, I got an odd reaction. But as you say, it is a useful way of pulling members closer, making them feel they are part of the project.. ‘signing the pledge’..
Raising the number of nominations to, say, 0.5% of the electorate, would be a positive move, especially if it was accompanied by the abolition of the deposit. It would give all political parties a real reason to communicate and stay in touch with the electorate. The signatures could be collected all year round, not just when an election is called. It would have the added benefit of weeding out candidates who are merely rich, but without much by way of support.