Memorandum by Royal Mail Group plc (PVF
06)
GENERAL
1. Did you experience problems because
the Government was slow in publishing the necessary statutory
instruments?
No. We had been developing our plans for some
time and built in contingencies for every eventuality.
2. Were problems caused by the very
short time scale between close of nominations and the need to
deliver postal voting documents to electors?
No. Royal Mails operation went very well.
3. Earlier pilots had been self selecting—ie
those who were keen and had the resources volunteered. Did the
fact that all postal ballots were mandatory for these elections
cause problems with skills and resources?
Not as far as Royal Mail was concerned.
4. Have you received/reported any allegations
of fraud?
Not relating to the postal network.
PRINTING AND
DISSEMINATION
5. Was there sufficient printing capacity
to cope with all-postal elections?
N/A
6. Did any of the ballot papers require
re-printing? If so, how many and why?
N/A
7. Do you have any comments to make
on the performance of the Royal Mail?
The Returning Officers will give their own opinions
but as far as Royal Mail is concerned, we felt everything went
very well.
8. How many ballot papers did you:
N/A
9. How many electors do you estimate
did not receive ballot papers:
N/A
NB. Royal Mail delivered all ballot papers
received into their Network, however due to time pressures and
accepting items that did not meet specification, a full audit
trail was not always maintained as proof of this. Royal Mail delivered
80% the next day and the rest within the agreed three days.
VOTING PRACTICALITIES
AND RETURNS
10. Are you aware of any practical difficulties
experienced by voters, as a result of:
(a) the need for a signed witness declaration.
(b) The dimensions of the ballot envelopes
(c) Complex and unclear instructions?
N/A
11. How many and what percentage of
ballot papers:
(a) Arrived back too late to be counted?
All ballot papers posted within time were cleared
from the Royal Mail Network and delivered to the local authorities.
Additionally a polling day sweep allowed for ballots posted on
final day of polling to be counted.
(b) Were not counted because of errors in
completion of the ballot paper or the witness declarations? What
percentage were these of the total votes cast?
N/A
12. Did all-postal voting increase turnout?
Yes in the pilot regions the average number
of votes cast more than doubled from 20% in 1999 to 42% in 2004.
13. For areas which had previously piloted
postal voting in local elections: was the turnout this year lower
than in previous years when all-postal voting was used?
N/A
COST AND
RESOURCES
14. As a result of using the all-postal
system did you need to bring in:
If so, at what cost?
N/A
15. What was the overall cost of the
election?
N/A
16. For areas with European Elections
only. Was the cost greater than a traditional ballot and if so,
by how much?
N/A
NB: Royal Mail incurred additional costs
to effectively manage printing delays and ensure all ballot packs
delivered in a timely fashion.
| 
