Select Committee on Constitutional Affairs Written Evidence


Memorandum by The Scottish Assessors' Association (VOT 24)

INTRODUCTION

  1.  The Scottish Assessors' Association (SAA) is pleased to contribute the following submission to the Joint Committees inquiry into voter registration. The SAA comprises the 14 Scottish Lands Valuation Assessors together with members of their senior staff. All 14 Assessors have also been appointed and act as EROs for their respective unitary authorities with the exception of the City of Dundee. The SAA accordingly represents all Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) in Scotland with the exception of the ERO for the City of Dundee. This submission deals with the issues in the order they are set out in the announcement of the Joint Inquiry.

  2.  By way of general introductory comment the SAA is very concerned about the likely detrimental effect of moving to individual registration on the level of registration. Under-registration is a growing problem which the SAA considers will drastically increase if individual registration is introduced, particularly if a form is issued to each elector. It is considered that moving to individual registration, even if it were to be made compulsory, would result in significant losses in the number of electors registered. The case for a change to individual registration has to be fully investigated, costed and its potential ramifications considered.

  3.  If consideration is being given to using the Electoral Register for other purposes (for example identity cards, citizens accounts etc) then the SAA believes that this should be declared at an early stage so that these wider aspects can be considered and incorporated into any draft proposals. Otherwise as Electoral Administrators we are concerned only with the function of collecting, maintaining and making available the data on the Register of Electors for elections.

  4.  When domestic rates were replaced with Community Charges significant important information on owners, tenants and occupiers was no longer available to a variety of organisations including government and local government departments. Any change to the current system should therefore be considered very carefully since it may not be possible to return to the current system at some future date without loss of data and confidence in the system.

  5.  It is clear that EROs would incur significant additional costs if individual registration were to be implemented. These would include, for example, additional costs relating to staffing, implementing the necessary changes to existing IT systems and stationery and postages. The SAA is concerned that these additional costs are fully investigated and financed.

Advantages of individual registration compared with the existing system of household registration

  6.  The SAA considers that the advantages of a system of individual registration compared with the existing system of household registration have to be viewed in the context of a move in the future towards electronic voting. If the ultimate policy aim of the Government is to enable electronic voting then stronger personal identifiers (including, as a minimum, dates of birth and signatures) would require to be captured. Individual registration would facilitate the inclusion of stronger personal identifiers in the registration process. As the current system stands it would not be possible to capture the signatures of individual electors.

  7.  It is hard to resist the data protection and human rights arguments for a move to individual registration especially in relation to the opt-out question. The Robertson case has pointed towards the introduction of individual registration because of certain requirements of Human Rights and Data Protection legislation. It seems contrary to 21st century thinking in relation to data protection and respect for the individual's human rights for a "head of household" to have responsibility for completion of the form on behalf of other individuals in the "household". The very concepts of "head of household" and "household" have changed and are less applicable in 21st century Britain compared with the 19th century. There are many more households in which unmarried adults live together where it might be presumptuous to assume one or other as the head of household. Also the looseness of the concept of head of household, whilst it has served well as a practical tool in relation to the annual canvass, has rendered prosecution impractical for non-return or return of false information.

  8.  The contrary argument, from an EROs point of view, is that the current system is understood and generally works well. A move to individual registration would give rise to practical difficulties. The collection of additional identifiers would represent an expansion of the design requirements of registration and election management systems which would require to be specified and financed. Some EROs argue that the householder is more likely to register residents than each individual doing it for themselves. They argue that the ERO is at least likely to know the name of a householder as opposed to every potential elector at an address. Another important question is how are potential electors to be canvassed if their name is not known to the ERO in the first place or even the number of people residing at that address.

Strategies for encouraging registration, in particular among young voters, and tackling resistance to registration; and examination of the advantages and disadvantages of compulsory registration

  9.  Local authorities should be under an obligation to assist the Electoral Registration Officer to carry out his duties by making available relevant information.

  10.  Education on voter registration and awareness of democratic participation should be undertaken by central government or Electoral Commission.

  11.  Best practice guidelines for canvassing and obtaining changes in registration should be developed and followed by the Electoral Commission in consultation with EROs.

  12.  At the basic level, one of the root causes of under registration is the lack of engagement of the electorate, particularly in the 18-25 age group. Civic education at an early stage and as an essential part of the schools curriculum is one area which should be tackled.

  13.  In relation to the compulsory registration issue, the sanctions which currently apply in Scotland are costly to pursue and difficult to enforce. At present in Scotland offences have to be referred to the Procurators Fiscal. Experience has shown that electoral registration cases are low priority in the workload of Procurators Fiscal and generally they are reluctant to pursue registration cases. In any case the degree of proof required is high and often not practicably achievable. Creating a new offence of failure to register would shift the onus of proof onto the individual who would have to demonstrate good reason as to why they were not registered. A new offence might ultimately have the effect of increasing the completeness of the register.

  14.  In relation to sanctions for failure to register it is suggested that unless individual identifiers are used and registration linked to other national databases—for example, driving license, national insurance, benefits agency, inland revenue, etc, compulsory registration would be ineffective and unworkable with respect to effective sanctions.

  15.  It is difficult to envisage effective reforms to the current system other than the adoption of a system of civil penalties which from the experience of Community Charges would be administratively cumbersome. A system of Civil Penalties imposed by the ERO would be easier to implement, but as with Community Charge the maintenance of the charge on appeal, due to the many valid excuses offered in mitigation, made the administrative process particularly onerous, and with little benefit.

  16.  Increasing fines and/or civil penalties to a level sufficiently high to encourage voters to register may have an effect if at the same time prosecutions/levies were pursued to give a clear message to people who have not complied.

  17.  As an alternative to compulsory registration a back to basic approach could be adopted involving a massive voter education campaign over a significant period to inform the public and the schoolchildren who will be future electors on how to register to vote and the benefits of participating in the democratic process. This would increase awareness amongst the electorate and could be run in conjunction with the following suggested changes to the current system:

    —  The registration system should be based on an annual canvass of individual eligible electors per household.

    —  One option would be to use a household form which would allow for signatures from all individuals resident.

    —  The penalty for non-return should be removed, as the system should remain voluntary.

    —  The form could be amended to highlight the disadvantages of failing to register to vote and allow any elector to sign a statement that they do not wish to register to vote.

    —  The penalty for supplying false information should be increased and highlighted.

    —  A new penalty could be introduced for denying another elector the opportunity to vote by failure to return their information.

Issues of geographic and ethnic variations in levels of voter registration

  18.  Publicity, electronic registration, the targeting of ethnic and community organisations and schools/colleges and the education and involvement of political agencies could each offer some improvement.

  19.  The provision of additional Electoral Commission support and by local community projects which are properly funded, organised and rolled out to meet the requirements of the identified client groups. Many individual groups are already targeted by EROs particularly in the run-up to elections. This should be formalised in good practice guidance.

  20.  Centrally funded TV and Radio advertising initiatives, and other publicity should be co-ordinated by the Electoral Commission. Compulsory promotion of the registration process by organisations such as housing bodies, estate agents and solicitors involved in conveyancing would also assist.

Advantages or disadvantages of electronic rather than paper-based registration systems

  21.  Telephone and internet returns of canvass forms where there is no change to the details held by the ERO are already being used by a number of Scottish EROs. The technology to move to full-blown electronic registration already exists in other spheres—internet shopping, and banking is now widespread. With political will and proper resourcing it is considered that through the use of similar technology electronic and telephone registration could be introduced within the relatively short term. Introduction of such technology would be contingent upon additional individual identifiers.

  22.  Extending the use of such technology to electoral registration would however require further research, stringent testing and possibly piloting before implementation.

Difficulties for the disabled and others unable to complete forms

  23.  The current system of Household Registration at the annual canvass allows the occupier to provided details of other members of the household. This means that anyone who is not physically capable of signing a form or who might have a literacy issue can have their name added to the form by someone else. The current legislation for Rolling Registration only allows for the applicant themselves to sign the declaration. Administrators currently use various methods to allow someone who is genuinely capable of voting but is unable to complete either a registration application or absent vote application eg the elector makes their mark and a witness signs that this is their mark, a person granted Power of Attorney (the Electoral Commission has advised that this is not strictly acceptable, although it is difficult to see how else administrators can deal with this issue when nothing is made in legislation.) It is clear that consideration must be given for this anomaly to be resolved in legislation, (in relation to the problems currently being experienced by administrators and not just the introduction of individual registration), as suggested above and perhaps to allow others such as, an Appointee in relation to state benefits, Doctor, Nurse, Social Worker etc to sign the form on the applicant's behalf. This should be accompanied by a declaration by the Attorney, Appointee etc that the applicant is unable to sign the declaration and stating the reason. Full Name and address of the attester should be a requirement.

  24.  Consideration also needs to be given as to how residents in Care and Nursing Homes would complete individual registration forms. If individual registration were to be introduced it may be that registration of the residents in these types of institutions should remain as it is.

  25.   Legislation currently allows the elector to sign or make their mark on the Declaration of Identity which accompanies a postal ballot paper. Legislation should be extended to allow this anywhere the elector is required to sign a form. (It is likely that in some cases, postal ballot papers are being completed on the elector's behalf if they are not physically able to mark the ballot paper).

Availability and confidentiality of the register

  26.  The current legislative arrangements restricting the availability of the full and edited versions of the Registers are reasonably satisfactory. One area of concern relates to the lack of restriction on the use which can be made of information copied from the register by means of hand written notes. There is apparently no restriction on what information may be obtained in this manner or what it may be used for. Individuals or companies wishing to build a database for commercial use can visit EROs' offices and could copy the whole unedited register if they wished. This freedom seems contrary to the tight restrictions elsewhere in the Regulations governing who may access and what use they make of the full version of the register.

  27.  Another area of concern is the use which can be made of the marked register. It is thought that the public are not generally aware of the existence of the marked register and the use made of it by political parties and others. Under Human Rights and Data Protection such availability has to be legally questionable since the ballot should be secret and so too the fact of whether or not a person has voted.

  28.  Under the regulations relating to the sale, inspection etc of the register and the introduction of the edited register it seems anomalous that the marked, full register can be checked and the names of those persons who have opted out of the edited register can be identified.

  29.  There is possibly an argument for access to the marked register by the political parties but with the limitation that it only is available to those persons who are entitled to a free copy of the register for political purposes and subject to the same restrictions as exist for use of the information.

  30.  There is a harder line which suggests that marked registers should only be available from the Sheriff/Lord Chancellor if an election petition is raised.

Basis for individual registration eg address-based or on personal criteria such as NI number or birth date

  31.  It is recognised that individual registration will require to be based on individual identifiers. It is considered that the individual registration should continue to be based on residence at an address. The introduction of personal identifiers such as NI number and date of birth as additional identifiers would facilitate progress towards electronic registration and electronic voting in the future. Experience of Community Charges however, when there was a requirement to provide date of birth, would suggest that asking individuals to provide NI numbers or date of birth information is likely to meet with resistance from some.

  32.  Not every potential elector would have been allocated a NI number, for example citizens of other EU countries. While this highlights the need for additional identifiers for electors who legitimately do not have a NI number, it does not in itself completely compromise use of the NI number. It does highlight the need for a range of personal identifiers.

  33.  The use of personal identifiers to produce a unique electoral number which individuals would retain for life would assist greatly in the electoral process.

  Examples of areas where a unique reference would assist are as follows:

    (a)  it could be used in the process of confirming existing registration details by electronic (or telephonic) means during canvass;

    (b)  it would be required for electronic voting;

    (c)  it would assist in the referral of change information from third party sources (Council Tax changes etc) if these other sources were to adopt the same identifier(s);

    (d)  it would assist in the confirmation of Absent Vote requests.

The desirability of a national electoral register

  34.  It is recognised that there is a need for a national register for use by the Electoral Commission in undertaking its statutory functions. It is recognised that the credit reference agencies that are currently entitled to purchase all locally produced Electoral Registers effectively use them to compile a national database based on the information they gather from the electoral registers. It would clearly assist them if a national register were available. Other users, currently entitled to copies of the full register such as law enforcement agencies, would benefit from the availability of a national register.

  35.  It is considered that any national register should be based on locally maintained registers.

Means of ensuring the security of the register: PIN numbers, electoral voting cards, signatures

  36.  The Northern Ireland registration model which uses date of birth, NI number, and signature appears to be a secure system. These identifiers if introduced in Great Britain could be used in the production of a unique electoral number which would be retained by the elector for life. Combining a unique electoral number with a PIN could be used to facilitate access to electoral registration services as well as electronic voting.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 25 January 2005