The following was originally posted on YouTube as a comment on the above video (February 2015).
I believe that if we have true democracy, then we should be able to reject all options on offer and tell the politicians to go away and come up with better alternatives, so I strongly support this proposal. If all of the candidates, or their parties, are rejected by the electorate, then they should fail at the ballot box, as opposed to us voting for the ‘least worst option’.
Currently, even if 100% of the ballot papers are spoiled, someone wins, because lots will be drawn to determine a winner (in the event of a tie). With regard to the re-run, I would support that if all the candidates from the first ballot are barred from any such. They must be all new candidates. Otherwise, you are effectively saying that the first ballot was a waste of time, like a mistrial, and this would not be respecting the result of the ballot that rejected them all in the first place.
The re-run with all new candidates may give a different result if it is the original candidates that were the problem. If however the problem is the lack of any acceptable party, or party policies, then the constituency should be able to continue to reject all of the above, by voting ‘NOTA’. In the event of a continuing vote for ‘NOTA’ (I don’t see the need for a 2nd re-run), then there should not be elections ad nauseum until someone wins, nor lots drawn. The constituency should be able to return no candidate and no MP therefore. As there will be no MP, the constituents should therefore be represented collectively by The Government. These constituents should be able to deal directly with Ministers and The Government over their issues that they might otherwise refer to their MP. If the failure of the political system results in a ‘none of the above’ scenario, then it is the politicians that should take the responsibility for filling the gap created by their failure to offer an acceptable candidate, or candidates, or policies.
In theory, this scenario could be repeated across the country and if that should occur, then we should be able to effectively say that the country has no confidence in any of the above. This would force all the parties to come-up with acceptable policies.
This nationwide scenario would be extremely unlikely, but nevertheless possible. It should be regarded by the political parties as a deterrent against complacency, doing what they like or even forming political cabals, where effectively it does not matter who wins, as you will get more-or-less the same sort of candidates and policies. “None of the above” would give true democratic power back to the electorate.