APPENDIX 8
Memorandum by the Rt Hon the Lord Parkinson
on behalf of the Conservative Party
ELECTION LAW AND ADMINISTRATION
1. Introduction
I welcome the opportunity to set out the views of
the Conservative and Unionist Party to the inquiry by the Home
Affairs Select Committee into Electoral law and administration.
I would be happy to clarify any points to the Committee.
2. Increasing the level of participation in local
and parliamentary elections and voter participation
We view the compilation of the Register of Electors
as a matter of great importance.
Turnout is considerably affected by its accuracy.
The overall level of turnout for General Elections
in the United Kingdom compares favourably with the turnout at
Presidential and Congressional election in the USA and in many
countries where voting is not compulsory.
Our existing system of registration does at first
appear too rigid. The Register of Electors for each constituency
in Great Britain is compiled four months before its publication
and in Northern Ireland it takes five months. However legislation
in 1983 introduced for the first time a more flexible claims procedure
which enables any person who was properly qualified on the qualifying
date—10 October—and whose name is not included in
the published register to make a claim for inclusion at any time
during the lifetime of that particular Electoral Register.
The question of the level of turnout has to be reviewed
in the light of existing registration practices and we must take
account of our more mobile population and an increasing number
of foreign nationals resident within the United Kingdom. It is
also a fact that a number of people make a conscious choice not
to register as a means of escaping notice or because they believe
they will escape from inclusion on the list of jurors.
As a vibrant and multi-cultural society we attract
a large number of aliens and it is interesting to note that in
a Labour Party campaign in 1994 entitled "The Missing Millions—Britain's
disenfranchised citizens"—the present Home Secretary
issued statistics based on OPCS figures relating to electoral
registration levels vis à vis Population. It showed
that the level of registration in the majority of local authority
areas was well above 90 per cent of the eligible population. This
figure was achieved without the need for compulsion.
Nevertheless these figures identified a number of
parliamentary constituencies with low levels of registration eg
67 per cent, 71 per cent. Not surprisingly one was Westminster,
where it is recognised that this urban borough has, as Rt. Hon
Peter Brooke MP has often pointed out, the highest level of aliens
in the country and in a more rural context, the District of Forest
Heath in Suffolk where the population contains a large number
of American servicemen working at the Lakenheath and Mildenhall
Air bases but resident in the local area, off base.
10An additional factor is that there is no standard
procedure at present for the extraction of deaths from the Register
of Electors prior to an election.
The level of registration could be improved in many
areas by the provision of more finance for local authorities who
administer the process of registration through their appointed
Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) so that a wider personal
canvass was possible at the time for registration.
Section 10 of the Representation of the People Act
1983 states that:
"With a view to the preparation of registers,
the registration officer shall have a house to house or other
sufficient inquiry made as to the persons entitled to be registered."
The term "sufficient inquiry" is interpreted
widely by local authorities. Some local authorities carry out
a canvass of all those households which have not returned Form
A but as this is not demanded by law, there are a number of local
authorities who merely send out Form A and do not issue any further
reminders of any kind.
Some local authorities use a combination of personal
and postal reminders. Where local authorities rely on personal
canvasses to retrieve Form A, the number of calls made by canvassers
varies. Other local authorities ask canvassers to call at properties
until contact is eventually made.
It is known that practice among those local authorities
who issue postal reminders also varies enormously, as does their
success rate. The threat of prosecution unless an individual returns
Form A sometimes engenders a response although very few local
authorities have the financial means to begin legal proceedings.
Those local authorities who have taken non-respondents to court
have found that on occasions the courts have not taken the matter
seriously.
One local authority has however pointed out to non-respondents
that their exclusion from the Register of Electors may pose problems
for them in obtaining credit or opening a bank account. This has
produced remarkable results, according to a study conducted by
Colin Rallings, Michael Thrasher and James Downe: "Enhancing
Local Electoral Turnout" (Joseph Rowntree Foundation 1986).
Not only do local authorities require additional
funding in order to comply with the provision of Section 10 of
the RPA Act, urgent consideration should be given to the establishment
of consistent procedures to require every local authority to undertake
a full canvass each year as a matter of course.
We recommend that the Home Office develop a much
clearer policy on registration for local authorities to provide
for consistency nation-wide.
Many Electoral Registers have inflated figures principally
brought about by the common practice of "carry forward".
This is where an elector failed to return their registration Form
"A" and the ERO simply carries forward their name for
a year or more, whether he or she has supporting evidence. Whilst
the Home Office recommends that "carry forward" is only
used for one year without supporting evidence, this advice is
widely ignored.
We recommend that local authorities should carry
forward names for one year only and that this rule be rigorously
enforced.
There are other factors which affect the level of
turnout at elections the main one being whether or not electors
have been stimulated into wanting to vote. During the last fifteen
years both the main political parties have experienced abstentions
by a significant number of their natural voters. The diminished
support for the Labour Party in 1983 and, more recently, the Conservative
Party's showing at the last General Election clearly indicated
that voters made a positive and conscious choice to abstain from
voting.
Often the weather or a local or national sporting
event can prove to be a deterrent to voting.
Frequently either illness on the day or urgent business
can make it difficult for people to vote.
Local authorities have employed a number of imaginative
schemes in an effort to increase registration eg posters on public
transport, advertising in local magazines and on the reverse of
supermarket receipts and car parking tickets, holding registration
road shows in supermarkets, high street and targeted in areas
of low registration. One local authority has introduced a prize
draw to encourage voters to register.
These campaigns should be encouraged and more research
carried out to measure their effect.
Some local authorities however take the view that
those people who wish to register will do so and recognise that
there is a core of people who will simply not register, for whatever
reason—and no amount of publicity and gimmicks will persuade
them otherwise.
Some EROs who have examined some of these initiatives
have decided that the traditional canvass is still the most effective
way of ensuring the accuracy of the register.
It is questionable whether dual registration (eg
students) should continue to be available at Parliamentary elections.
It may be considered preferable for individuals to be registered
for any local authority in which they are properly qualified but
to be required, at the time of registration, to state in which
constituency they wish to cast their vote at a parliamentary election.
3. Response to a rolling register
Rolling registers have been suggested for a number
of years as a means of improving the process of registration and
thereby increasing turnout.
The one major draw back is that such registers could
not be successfully introduced piecemeal. To be successful a constituency
rolling register needs to be able to deal with the reception or
transfer of names to or from other constituencies nationwide.
There will need to be clear safeguards built in to maintain the
integrity of the electoral register which will become more prone
to illicit interference or allegations of such interference.
The Register of Electors is the base line for our
democratic elections and our electoral system must not only be
fair but must be seen to be fair. It is likely that a completely
new security process would have to be developed—one which
is acceptable to the electorate, to political parties and their
candidates.
The cost implications of introducing such a system
will need careful consideration.
There should be far greater collaboration between
local authorities and sharing of successful techniques and ideas
used to mount registration campaigns before implementing a nation-wide
rolling register.
Under a rolling register, the onus would still be
on the elector to inform the local authority of any change to
their address.
A rolling register would potentially place a financial
and logistical burden on political parties. Even under the current
system, all the main political parties agree that there are a
number of problems associated with the gathering and conversion
of local authority data. A rolling register would only add to
these financial and logistical burdens.
Under the current system, local authorities are not
obliged to release the Register of Electors on magnetic form at
the same time as the printed register (15 February). Moreover,
local authorities are not obliged to provide the Register in a
standard form to political parties.
The idea of a rolling register is a technically ambitious
scheme which would demand that local authorities standardise practices
and adhere to strict guidelines and rules. It would seem sensible
for local authorities to standardise their existing practices
before moving to a more complicated and intricate method.
4. The registration of homeless persons
Registration under successive legislation has always
required a residential qualification. Nevertheless the question
of the registration of the homeless has exercised a number of
people for some years. The problem with the registration of the
homeless is the fact that they do not have a place which can be
shown to be their lawful address and at which they can be contacted
should any information need clarifying or where a poll card can
be sent.
The fact that homeless people cannot contacted makes
registration impractical and opens up the avenue for fraudulent
registration.
We recommend that to ensure homeless people are not
deprived of their right to vote, pilot schemes should be tested
in number of areas, whereby a person who declares that he or she
is homeless to a local authority may register in a particular
local authority Ward provided that a means of identification is
supplied by the homeless person. We recommend that this should
be a person's National Insurance Number. The homeless person should
be shown on the Register of Electors under "Other Electors".
5. Voting on days other than Thursdays
Our present system of voting is recognised world
wide for its fairness and for its lack of electoral corruption.
Whatever changes are considered need to be carefully compared
with our present system, a system that has stood the test of time.
There is no existing statute that requires elections
to be held on a Thursday. Elections are held on public holidays
or at weekends in some European countries. In others, voting is
spread over more than one day. The question must be whether turnout
will be significantly increased by moving polling day to a weekend.
Any such move need not affect the technicalities of running an
election.
We would not support the idea of polling on a Sunday.
6. Absent voting
There is evidence of confusion among the public over
the term "absent voting". Consideration should therefore
be given to assist local authorities embark on a more concerted
campaign to highlight the availability of postal and proxy votes.
Few local authorities make any significant effort to increase
the number of postal and proxy voters except perhaps among the
student population and sending forms in bulk supplies to residential
care homes.
Consideration should be given to including information
about postal and proxy voting on Form A together with a facility
for the elector to request the appropriate forms by simply ticking
a box. Similarly, there is no reason why poll cards should not
be posted much earlier to electors on which information on postal
and proxy voting could be given. These schemes would not require
additional resources as these forms are posted to electors by
law.
There has been general agreement between the political
parties that the applications for proxy votes need to be tightened
to ensure that the applicant signs the application, rather than
the proxy. This follows a number of legal actions where the validity
of the appointed proxy has been challenged.
All political parties are aware that the enthusiasm
of their supporters sometimes leads them to ignoring or breaking
rule of procedure. There is also general agreement that the Form
RPF9b for emergency sickness should be made available for those
who have to deal with emergency business matters.
The attestation of postal and proxy voter forms have
raised further questions however. The requirement that a Form
RPF7b be countersigned by a medical practitioner or registered
nurse has raised the question as to whether some elderly or infirm
voters do not wish to bother their GPs or district nurses. Some
GPs are unhelpful and insist on charging patients for signing
postal and proxy vote forms. We believe that this matter should
be addressed and clearer guidance provided.
7. "Early" voting, mobile ballot boxes,
and compulsory voting
We would support in principle the concept of "early
voting" provided that there were strict safeguards to prevent
fraud. The rules for early voting should meet with the approval
of the political parties. Advanced or whether "Early voting"
facilities are provided for electors in New Zealand, Australia
and the USA. Such a move could certainly be less expensive than
postal voting and there is less risk of fraud than voting by post
or proxy. We suggest that some pilot schemes might be helpful.
These should be closely monitored with a view to widening these
provisions to assist those who find that they have missed the
deadline for a postal or proxy vote.
The risk of fraud is greater however with the idea
of mobile ballot boxes although we would not object to some pilot
schemes for those electors in hospital or residential care homes
being allowed to vote in this manner. We would not however support
the idea of mobile polling stations moving around an electoral
area during polling day.
The Australian experience includes many of these
ideas and shows that these changes considerably increased the
opportunities for fraud and they have, to some extent, undermined
the integrity of their electoral system. There are cogent reasons
for rejecting each of them unless proper safeguards are introduced.
Some of these ideas are stimulated by a misplaced
belief that to open up the existing system and remove traceability
of voters will lead to a more democratic society. Far from discouraging
personation and fraud, for example, they actually encourage it,
by making the system easier to breach.
With regard to compulsory voting, we recognise that
support for compulsory voting in Britain is limited and we do
not support the idea.
8. Access to polling stations for people with disabilities
Whilst not one could legitimately object to the provision
of improved access to polling stations, there is a significant
cost implication to local authorities, particularly in rural areas
where the facilities used for polling stations are not as modern
or accessible as those in some urban areas.
Many disabled people are quite content to obtain
an absent vote rather than leaving it to chance and finding on
polling day that they are either unwell or unable to gain access
to the Polling Station. However a number of disability groups
take the view that postal and proxy votes are a second best choice.
It has to be recognised that some polling station
cannot be made fully accessible without making major structural
alterations. Local authorities should be encouraged to undertake
a regular review of access to polling stations in conjunction
with local groups which represent disabled people. Most local
authorities provide ramps and disabled booths where possible.
More consideration should be given to assist the
visually impaired to cast their votes in secret eg the publication
of ballot papers in Braille, marking bright lines at the top of
the ballot box and providing magnifying glasses.
A "mini" ballot box should be made available
at each Polling Station into which a person who is unable to gain
access to the Polling Station may place their vote. On arrival
at the Polling Station, a voter could ask for the assistance of
the Presiding Officer to cast his or her vote outside the normal
precincts of the room set aside for voting. The Presiding Officer
could take the ballot box to the voter concerned. The elector
could then cast a vote in relative secrecy eg in his or her car,
in an adjacent room close to the entrance to the Polling Station
etc.
There may be a case for allowing disabled people
the opportunity to vote at an easily accessible Polling Station,
for example at the Town Hall earlier in the week or on Polling
Day.
9. The size and type of ballot papers and the use
of symbols and photographs
The present size, shape and style of ballot papers
have been shown to be perfectly adequate for all elections but
there is a strong lobby of opinion from among the Association
of Electoral Administrators to move our system towards a more
automotive system.
We would not oppose automated counting of votes provided
that the necessary safeguards were introduced under strictly defined
guidelines.
The suggestion that symbols should be incorporated
onto ballot papers is in line with the practice in a number of
emerging democracies especially in Africa where the level of illiteracy
is often high.
We totally oppose the use of logos or photographs
printed on ballot papers. All that is required is that the description
of each candidate is clear and not open to abuse. It should be
recognised that political parties wish to change or amend their
logos and symbols. There is also the danger that Returning Officers
would be drawn into unnecessary conflicts over the use and the
copyright of logos, particularly if an Independent candidate sought
to use the logo of a political party by amending it even slightly.
10. Description of candidates
There is a serious problem with the Description of
Candidates, as was witnessed at the last General Election when
political parties made applications to the Court to restrain individuals
standing against bona fide Party candidates from using
false descriptions. The cost of taking this necessary action was
considerable.
At an election every candidate is entitled, though
not mandated, to use if they wish up to six words by way of description
on their nomination paper.
The "Literal Democrat" case in Devon highlighted
the nonsenses that had been perpetrated by a number of independents
in the past.
The government have indicated its intention to introduce
legislation for the registration of political parties. If this
measure is approved by Parliament then it would seem sensible
for political parties properly registered to be able to register
a range of descriptions of the use by their candidates. A range
of description is important because political parties permit candidates
to use variants of their basic approved description. Apolitical
party should also be able to safeguard its position by registering
even those colloquial descriptions such as, in our case, "Tory",
in order that they are not misused by opponents in an attempt
to deceive the electorate.
11. Nominations and the deposit
The number of assentors to any nomination paper for
Parliamentary or local government elections stands at 10 and for
elections to the European Parliament, 30. These are low figures
compared to the size of the electorate in a local government ward
or Parliamentary constituency. There has been pressure from a
number of sources to increase the number of assentors required
in order to nominate a candidate, the aim being to make it more
difficult for frivolous candidates to be nominated.
A candidate's deposit at a General Election was increased
from £150 to £500 by the Representation of the People
Act 1985. We would not oppose an increase in the deposit at parliamentary
election from £500 to say £2,000 to maintain the value
of the deposit based on inflation and in order to discourage frivolous
candidates.
However any considerable increase in the number of
assentors required might discourage genuine independent candidates.
Such an increase would add further pressure on the Returning Officer's
staff administering the elections.
12. Procedure for voting at polling stations
The result of a number of elections have been successfully
challenged on an election petition where a small number of ballot
papers were found not to have the official mark, as in the case
of Winchester last year.
A number of alternative methods for marking ballot
papers are to be considered by the Home Office Working Party.
These range from the incorporation of a water mark to bar coding.
Provided that the fairness of a poll is not compromised or changes
introduced which might lead to the possibility of interference
with ballot papers, we would not oppose the investigation of a
different method of franking ballot papers.
13. The role for an electoral commission
At the last General Election there were numerous
breaches of election law which went unchallenged. Matters referred
to the DPP are rarely brought to Court unless the DPP considers
that an individual has committed a corrupt practice or criminal
action. This reluctance by the DPP has meant that quite blatant
breaches of election law by way of illegal practices escape the
penalties prescribed by Statute.
Whether an Electoral Commission is established or
not, the reluctance of the police or the DPP to investigate alleged
breaches of election law must be addressed. There is an increasing
danger of individuals making a mockery of election law as the
number of instances of clear breaches continue to be unchallenged
or frequently ignored.
A number of countries have established Electoral
Commissions to oversee the process of elections, review constituency
boundaries at all levels of representation and to maintain and
uphold election law.
Should an Electoral Commission be established it
must be independent of interference from Government, answerable
to Parliament and open to challenge through the Courts.
April 1998
| 
