Connecting Crouch End and Hornsey with news, views and information
I hope I may be wrong about some of this. I think I will only properly find out by following the process through, so I have raised a petition on the Haringey website asking for changes to the Haringey e-petition system. I'm not optimistic about getting many signatures, but I think I ought to know how this works. As things stand it seems to me the Haringey e-petition system provides a tiny bit of help to the democratic process, which is more than outweighed by the barriers it puts in place.
The image below is of a petition handed in to the Australian Government.
I will, when a member of the Democratic Services Team at Haringey, has reviewed my petition, provide a link here to it. If it passes muster!
What I think I wirote was:
We, the undersigned ask that Haringey amend its epetition system so that:
1) it is possible for signatories to contact the author of the petition, even if this be post restante, or by a forwarding mechanism, at Haringey
2) that the author's name be published
3) that the author of the petition can contact signatories for follow up actions, even if this contact be post restante, or by a forwarding mechanism, at Haringey
4) that signatories be given the chance when signing to opt in to having their details (name and/or email address) shown on a list associated with the petition
5) that signatories be given the option to present credentials from a social media site to which they are already signed in
That the epetition initiation page be amended to point out the restrictions on the service, and users be informed that other online petition services are available
My request for a petition has been rejected. Not the right route apparently, but they don't tell me what is the right route.
Dear Mr Essex,
Thank you for your email. My response to your enquiries is as follows:
Our e-petitions are hosted on a portal developed by modern.gov. The details of signatories is held on the portal, and only officers with necessary access and passwords may view this information.
The Lead Petitioner has the option to request that the details of signatories is made public. Unless the list is made public the Lead Petitioner is not able to view it. On this occasion as the Lead Petitioner for this particular petition has not requested to make the list public we do not feel it would be appropriate to share their name and details with you.
I note that you have submitted a request for an e-petition to change the process by which we administrate such e-petitions. We have made the decision to reject this e-petition on the grounds that this is not the correct route for you to raise this issue. It may be helpful for you to note that we would accept a petition that had been hosted on an alterative website, as long as the list of signatories could also be submitted (if necessary in printed form).
Feedback Review Officer
Shared Service Centre | Central Team
Quite right too. If they'd have accepted your anti-petition petition it would have canceled itself out. The council is correct to reject the frivolous and concern itself only with the things that matter. That is to say not anti-matter.
Did you stop and think before you sent the anti-petition petition what would happen if your anti-matter met the things that matter?
I thought not.