The Quick vote
The Quick vote – A “North Korean approach” to democracy.
Lord Sumption
One checkbox. Many organisations. One big question:
Should Member democracy come with a recommended answer?
The Quick Vote is now used in a growing number of Member governed organisations across the UK, including building societies, charities, sporting bodies and membership organisations.
Its forms vary. Its stated purpose is usually the same: to make voting “convenient” by allowing Members to cast multiple votes in a single action.
But more convenient for whom? Members casting their votes? Or Board’s receiving these?
Critics argue that this “convenience” comes at a cost.
When voting systems encourage Members to adopt pre-prepared positions rather than make independent choices, democracy risks becoming a formality.
Writing in The Telepgraph, former Supreme Court judge, Lord Sumption, referred to the Quick vote as a “North Korean approach” to democracy.
Note that bloc voting like the Quick Vote is prohibited by law in other forms of democratic processes in the UK e.g. Trade Union Executive Elections.
The Quick vote isn’t a Nationwide problem.
It’s a plague on democracy, nationwide.
Nationwide Building Society may be the largest and longest user of the Quick vote.
- Nationwide introduced the Quick vote over 20 years ago, in 2006.
- As at the end of the last financial year (31st March 2026), Nationwide had 16.4 million Member owners.
- 9.3 million Nationwide Members are eligible to vote ahead of the 2026 AGM (15th July 2026).
- In 2025, 0.67 million Members voted, and 87% of them used the Quick vote.
- Fewer than 4% of total Members, and fewer than 8% of eligible Members voted in 2025.
- So just 1% of eligible Members actually voted on the individual resolutions on the Voting Form in 2025.
As the bloc of Quick votes becomes larger over time, the individual power of Member voters is eroded, Elections become predictable, people disengage, democracy is weakened, and accountability is reduced.
This is why a growing proportion of parliamentarians and the media are calling out the state of democracy in member governed organisations like the building society sector, e.g.
- “a democracy deficit at Nationwide” – Nils Pratley, writing in The Guardian (27th April 2026)
- “emerging governance issues in the building society sector” – Nav Mishra MP, writing to the Chancellor (1st May 2026)
Nationwide is not the only organisation harnessing the Quick vote. Across the UK, Member governed organisations are increasingly introducing forms of “Quick Vote” or bundled voting mechanisms designed to simplify participation.
The details differ. The democratic concerns remain remarkably similar.
How does Quick Vote work?
There isn’t just one version of the Quick Vote. Different organisations implement it in different ways.
Example 1: The recommendation model e.g. Nationwide Building Society (2026)
How does the Quick vote work?
A Member is invited to appoint the Chairman of the AGM to vote for them in line with the Board’s recommendations. In 2026, this means voting for the Ordinary resolutions, the Election and re-election of Board Appointed Candidates, and a vote Against a Member Nominated Candidate, put forward by the Members of the building society as an alternative.
How is the Quick vote positioned?
The “Quick vote” option is positioned as instruction #1, featuring prominently at the top of the Voting Form.
How prominent is the Quick vote?
On the paper version of the Voting Form, the Quick vote checkbox (where you place your X mark) is 5x higher and wider than the “Standard vote” i.e. it takes up 25x the area of any other voting checkbox option on the page.
How is the Quick vote implemented in a digital context?
On the digital version of the Voting Form, if the Quick vote checkbox is selected, the “Standart vote” part of the form disappears. On a mobile screen, it is therefore possible that the option to vote for each resolution separately is not seen.
How transparent is the Quick vote?
Historically, Nationwide has not published statistics regarding what proportion of votes are cast using the Quick vote. This year it disclosed that 87% of Members used the Quick vote option in 2025.
It’s also not always clear when selecting the Quick vote what the specific detail of the recommendations or resolutions (referred to as “items”) are that you are being invited to support.
For example, displayed before the Quick vote check box, the form reads:
The Board recommends you vote ‘For’ each of the items 1-13. The Board recommends you vote ‘Against’ item 14. If you are happy with this, simply put your X in the Quick vote box to the right. Then sign and date the declaration below.
It is not clear at this point, looking at the top part of the form, what the specifics of the items are, e.g. that Members are being recommended to vote Against a Member Nominated Candidate (James Sherwin-Smith). A confirmation page is listed once your selection has been made and you click Next, but it is possible that at this point most people quickly scan to the bottom of the page, skipping the detail, to find the Submit button to complete the process. See this mobile screen recording for an example of how this works in 2026.
Critics argue this design creates a powerful default in favour of the incumbent leadership. This is something that has been concerning appeal court judges for over 100 years.
The quick vote is not the only form of bias that Nationwide has used to influence the election of the first Member Nominated Candidate for over 20 years. Read the 12 ways Nationwide has biased an election of 9.3 million people against me – and some notable 1sts (🥇) along the way.
Example 2: The bundled voting model e.g. Coventry Building Society
At the Coventry Building Society’s 2026 AGM, Members were presented with three “all at once” options:
- FOR all
- AGAINST all
- WITHHELD all
Supporters say this makes participation simpler.
Critics argue it discourages Members from considering each resolution or candidate individually.
Example 3: The National Trust’s support for endorsed candidates
The National Trust is another large member governed organisation that incorporates the Quick vote in its AGM voting procedures, both to vote the Board’s recommendation when it comes to resolutions, but also for the election of Natinoal Trust Council members.
See the before and after effect of the introduction of the Quick vote on National Trust Council elections in 2022 as set out clearly in this Restore Trust pamphlet (see the two charts on page 6). The same organisation published a longer paper on The effect of the Quick Vote on democracy in the National Trust.
Behavioural science tells us something important: defaults matter.
People often accept the easiest option. That may increase turnout. But does it strengthen democracy?
The role of Civica Election Services
Civica Election Services (“CES” – formerly Electoral Reform Services, or “ERS”) acts as the “independent scrutineer” for many member governed organisations. It’s unclear how much of a role CES has in designing and defining the electoral process, but on the basis that different organisations implement different variations of the Quick vote, and seemingly use very similar digital processes and eVoting platform, CES has an influential role.
Previous questions put to CES by the campaign have gone unanswered: either CES can not or will not answer these, or thinks it more appropriate to route these back to the management of the Member organisation. The degree of transparency into voting form design and election decisions often falls short of expectations.
Less about the appartus, more about the design
This campaign is not opposed to:
✓ online voting
✓ mobile voting
✓ higher turnout
✓ simpler processes
This campaign asks a different question:
Where is the line between making voting easier…
…and influencing how Members vote?
Democracy should require a decision
Voting is supposed to be a moment of judgement. You read. You think. You decide.
Quick vote systems invite Members to skip most of that process:
- Sometimes by following recommendations,
- Sometimes by voting for or against everything at once,
- Sometimes by delegating the decision entirely.
The result may be efficient. But efficiency is not the same as democracy.
Why I’ve turned this into a slogan
What started as an objection, became a plea, if not instruction. It’s not become part of a wider campaign.
DO NOT USE THE QUICK VOTE.
I don’t want to be told how to vote. Not by a Board. Not by a Chair. Not by default. Not by a cleverly designed shortcut.
If democracy means anything, it means Members making their own choices.
Which is why there is now a small, simple DO NOT USE THE QUICK VOTE online store which provides additional ways for people to show their support for this key message.
Start the conversation. Support Member democracy.
DO NOT USE THE QUICK VOTE.
Every purchase helps fund:
- further research into Quick vote systems;
- campaigning for stronger Member rights;
- public education on Member democracy;
- advocacy for fairer elections and governance.
The question isn’t whether voting should be easy.
The question is whether democracy should come with a shortcut.
The Quick vote is spreading. Its forms differ. Its consequences are still being debated.
Now is the time to ask:
Are Members making decisions?
Or simply accepting recommendations?
Why James Sherwin-Smith is standing as a Member Nominated Candidate for Election to the Board of Directors of Nationwide Building Society
You can vote for James if you are an eligible Nationwide Member (voting closes 13th July 2026).
Please consider donating to the James4Nationwide campaign Crowdfunder.
Get weekly email updates from the campaign by entering the weekly free prize draw for your chance to win £100.
DO NOT USE THE QUICK VOTE merchandise is available to buy online. Designed, finished and shipped from the UK. The £2 profit on every item goes to the James4Nationwide campaign Crowdfunder.