Select Committee on Constitutional Affairs Written Evidence


Memorandum by The Electoral Reform Society (ERS) (VOT 36)

SUMMARY

  1.  ERS believes that there are strong arguments for voter registration continuing to be compulsory.

  2.  We believe that individual registration offers significant advantages over household registration although a revised form of household registration could provide many benefits.

  3.  Registration should involve the collection of at least one personal identifier (eg signature, NI number etc). A signature if collected could then be required for any electoral transaction.

  4.  The Electoral Registration Officer/Returning Officer should be required to check at least a random sample of each type of transaction.

  5.  We believe serious consideration should be given to the arguments for introducing a requirement for voters to sign for ballot papers they receive in polling stations.

  6.  Commonly held beliefs (whether justified or not) as to the uses to which the electoral register is put are a contributory factor to under-registration we believe. We therefore recommend that non-electoral uses of the register should be reconsidered.

  7.  The register should continue to be available for all electoral purposes and for inspection by the public as at present.

  8.  Registration officers should be given clear and objective criteria for the use of anonymous or unaddressed registration.

  9.  A national electoral register available to electoral administrators in an on-line format would be advantageous in enabling changes to be made more speedily and more accurately and in enabling electors to vote at locations convenient to them. If available to electoral administrators in an on-line format then consideration should be given to allowing political parties access to this format as well.

  10.  Electoral registration should continue to be promoted with the onus on electoral registration officers to promote registration in their areas.

  11.  However, there is a need for a clearer statement of the legal requirement to register and a clearer policy by electoral registration officers and the authorities to prosecute those who deliberately fail to register.

HISTORY

  12.  The Electoral Reform Society was founded in 1884 to promote changes to our electoral system to ensure fairer and more representative democracy. Whilst our principal aim remains changing the voting system to one which allows more personal choice and a more proportional outcome, we are also concerned with the strengthening of democracy through matters such as voter education, the mechanics of elections, voting methods, candidate selection and the voting age.

COMPULSORY REGISTRATION

  13.  A properly enforced system of compulsory registration provides a number of advantages which include:

    —  Preventing a dominant head of household denying registration to those who they believe would vote contrary to their wishes.

    —  Higher turnouts (even if not in percentage terms). A system of voluntary registration presents a barrier to participation for those who reach polling day without having taken the decision to register. In the United States, although 74.6% of those registered to vote did so in the 2004 elections, this constituted only 56.2% of those among the voting age population. Voluntary registration puts an additional barrier between the citizen and the ability to cast a vote, requiring a commitment of effort not only on election day but on a regular basis beforehand.

    —  Equality of opportunity. The current system of compulsory registration with a few, clearly defined, exceptions means that it is the law rather than anyone else which decides whether a person is "fit" to vote.

  14.  A system of voluntary registration could be said to have an advantage in boosting the level of activity of the political parties and, consequently, the level of communication between parties and electors. In the United States, parties form the backbone of registration drives and see a pay-off in the level of their voting support for their efforts. However, this might also be said to put excessive burdens on voluntary organisations.

  15.  Therefore, the Electoral Reform Society supports the retention of the current system of compulsory registration.

FRAUD PREVENTION

  16.  The Electoral Reform Society believes that a significant threat to democracy and participation levels is electoral fraud or the perception thereof. Whilst successful prosecutions are still at a relatively low level many of the allegations of fraud which are brought to our attention do not appear to have been fully investigated.

  17.  We further believe that there is a perception among voters that the level of fraud is at a higher level still. Fraud prevention should not simply be vigorous and effective but it must be perceived by the public as being so.

  18.  The primary responsibility for fraud prevention should rest with the individual electoral registration officer and returning officer. That many cases are dropped by the police or prosecuting authorities might suggest a need for improving these bodies understanding of the issues. It should always be in the public interest to prosecute those against whom a prima facie case of electoral fraud can be shown.

  19.  In order to significantly increase fraud prevention activities, there should be a designated responsibility for electoral registration officers and returning officers to investigate random samples of applications to go on the register, applications for postal or proxy votes and voting in polling stations.

  20.  Such an increase in the duties of registration and returning officers will require an increase in their budgets and staffing levels. This would be money well spent and would lead to a visible increase in the level of fraud prevention.

INDIVIDUAL VS HOUSEHOLD REGISTRATION

  21.  The Electoral Reform Society believes that individual registration of electors would be a significant step forward on the current system of household registration.

  22.  Such a move would place the responsibility for registration on each individual rather than a "head of household". This personal responsibility would provide for more accountability for failure to register.

  23.  Individual registration forms provided in libraries or council offices and other public buildings as well as dropped through doors would also help to prevent heads of households acting as a barrier to registration.

  24.  An alternative would be to retain a single registration form for each household but to require each individual to sign the form. Such a move would mean personal identifiers would be held on file for each elector but that the advantages detailed in 23 and 24 above would not be gained.

  25.  We recognise that moving towards individual, rather than household, registration could lead to a drop in the number of those registered. We believe that such a move would need to be accompanied with a large scale publicity campaign to ameliorate such a drop.

PERSONAL IDENTIFIERS

  26.  The Electoral Reform Society believes that the greatest single advance in fraud prevention would be the collection of "personal identifiers" from registered electors.

  27.  Such identifiers could take a number of forms including date of birth, national insurance number, PIN number etc. However, we believe that a signature appears to be the most logical identifier as it is personal to each elector, appears to be difficult to forge and impossible (under normal circumstances) to forget.

  28.  Once collected, personal identifiers would provide the first step in checking whether an electoral transaction was actually carried out by the elector in question. In cases where electoral staff were unable to validate the identifier, further checks could be made, but the number of such cases would be tiny compared to checks where there was no identifier on file.

  29.  We do not suggest that personal identifiers are the complete answer to fraud, and they will do nothing to prevent many types of fraud in cases of remote voting. However, they would be a significant step forward.

SIGNING FOR BALLOT PAPERS

  30.  The Electoral Reform Society believes that serious consideration should be given to the arguments for introducing a requirement for voters to sign for ballot papers they receive in polling stations.

  31.  At present, there is no requirement for voters presenting themselves at a polling station to identify themselves other than in exceptional circumstances. It would be reasonable to ask electors to sign the electoral register next to their name when they receive their ballot paper. In cases of suspicion, these signatures could be checked against those collected during the formation of the register (if signatures are collected at this stage) or voters contacted after the election and a signature collected at that stage. Ballot papers could be excluded if the signature collected at the polling station was found to be fraudulent. A requirement to sign for ballot papers exists in most countries of the world.

  32.  The introduction of a national identity card system, if approved by Parliament, would allow for more comprehensive identity checks to be made at the polling station. In deciding whether to proceed with such a change, consideration would have to be given to the additional burdens this would place on polling station staff. We recommend that a system of signing for ballot papers and subsequent checking be introduced in any case.

USE OF THE ELECTORAL REGISTER

  33.  The Electoral Reform Society believes that the electoral register should be used only for electoral purposes. We believe that the perception of the other uses to which the register will be put is a significant factor in the level of under-registration in this country. Although now abolished, the introduction of the poll tax and the use of the electoral register to investigate cases of non-payment led to significant under-registration. A clear statement that the register is only for electoral uses would help to end this problem.

  34   Whilst the introduction of a two tier system of electoral registers has helped, there is still an anomaly whereby credit reference agencies are permitted to use the full version of the register. We believe that this should be reviewed.

  35.  We support the continued use by political parties and others concerned with an election of the full version of the register.

  36.  We support the existing right of the public to view the full version of the register but would argue that it should be made a requirement for people doing so to sign a statement that they are doing so for legitimate (ie registration and election related) purposes. We recognise, however, that simply asking a person viewing or using the register to sign a statement of legitimate use will not end all abuse.

ANONYMOUS AND UNADDRESSED REGISTRATION

  37.  We note that there is currently a facility for people to appear on the register as a name and electoral number only (ie without an address). This is used only in special circumstances such as spousal abuse.

  38.  We support the continuing existence of this provision but believe that its use should be strictly limited to cases where the elector is at significant risk of physical harm if their address is publicised. Registration officers should be given clear and objective criteria for the use of this provision.

NATIONAL ON -LINE REGISTER

  39.  The Electoral Reform Society sees an advantage in the creation of a national on-line electoral register. Such a document would make the process of registering and de-registering people much easier in cases where a person moves house across local authority boundaries.

  40.  If available to electoral administrators in an on-line format then consideration should be given to allowing political parties access to this format as well.

  41.  An on-line register available in real time would also allow electors to cast their vote in a polling station other than their designated station.

  42.  As a first step, we support a pilot to create a real time on-line register covering an entire Parliamentary Constituency or Local Authority area and allowing electors to vote at any polling station within that area at one election.

PROMOTION OF REGISTRATION

  43.  The Electoral Reform Society believes that it should continue to be the responsibility of electoral registration officers to promote registration in their area.

  44.  Registration drives should focus on both the positive benefits of registration as well as the potential penalties for failure to do so.

  45.  However, consideration should be given to the production of a model procedure for registration officers in the execution of their duties. This might provide for the number of canvasses both by mail/delivery drop and in person as well as the number of years for which entries may be carried over as well as thresholds which would require further action. It would be the responsibility of the funding authorities to provide sufficient resources to allow registration officers to carry out their duties and for registration officers to show that they have carried them out properly.

  46.  There should also be best practice guidelines produced to show innovative schemes for publicity and registration.

  47.  The duty for promoting registration on a national basis and for overseeing the work of electoral registration officers locally should rest with the Electoral Commission.

PUNISHMENT FOR FAILING TO REGISTER

  48.  The Electoral Reform Society believes that effective prosecution and punishment of those who fail to register would act as a boost to registration efforts. However, we believe that such moves should run alongside efforts to promote the benefits of registration.

  49.  The potential punishment for failure to register should be made clearer and should form a more prominent part of registration initiatives in a similar way to that in which the punishment for failure to have a TV licence is publicised.

  50.  There should be a significantly lower level of tolerance for those who fail to correctly complete (or fail to complete at all) a registration form. This should include a presumption in favour of prosecution.

CONCLUSION

  51.  The Electoral Reform Society views electoral registration as being a key part of the democratic process. We believe that there is the opportunity to make improvements to the current system which will aid the prevention of fraud, boost registration and enable electors to vote with more convenience. We commend the Committees on this inquiry and are willing to provide any more evidence that they may feel useful to their work.



 
previous page contents

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

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 25 January 2005