WHEN we held elections for parent-governors, we had an unexpected vacancy for another one shortly afterwards. Would it be in order to give the seat to the runner-up and save the expense of another round of elections?
No, it would not. The election you held was for a specified number of seats and candidates were put forward with that in mind. Others may be interested in the casual vacancy and the parents, as voters, might wish to consider how to vote on this occasion, in the light of the balance or representation returned on the first occasion. The temptation to economise on cost and effort is understandable, but must be resisted.
