5 Conclusion
76. Following the introduction of the Electoral Fraud
(Northern Ireland) Act 2002, significant changes were made to
electoral registration and the electoral process in Northern Ireland.
The most significant change in the registration process has been
the move from household to individual registration. Electoral
registers produced under the new system have indicated an apparently
dramatic decline in the proportion of the eligible population
who are registered. There is a difference of 10 percent between
the proportion of the eligible population included on the last
pre-Act register and the current register.
77. It seems clear to us that this decline has been
caused by several factors. The first, and most significant, is
the abolition of carry-over from one register to the next, which
has meant that names of people who do not respond to the annual
canvass are no longer automatically left on the register for one
year. As a result, people on the register who move to a new address,
leave Northern Ireland, or die during the year no longer appear
on the next register.
78. The second appears to be that a significant proportion
of the eligible population does not register. There are several
causes for this but there is little doubt that one of the most
significant is the change to individual registration. The shift
away from a system, where one person in each household registers
the entire household to one in which each individual has the responsibility
for their own registration requires individuals to be more pro-active
if their names are to be included on the register. Factors ranging
from political disengagement to practical obstacles can result
in people from any social group failing to register. However,
it is clear to us that it is among groups such as young people
(particularly 17 and 18 year olds) people with disabilities, and
people from socially deprived areas, that individual registration
is problematic. These groups are more difficult for election publicity
to reach partly because of higher than average levels of personal
mobility and lower than average levels of political engagement
and exposure to the media.
79. The third reason for the decline in the electoral
register is these are less fraudulent entries on the register.
The level of actual fraud committed before and after the introduction
of the Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 cannot be established,
but it is clear that the public perceives fraud to be much less
prevalent now than before the introduction of the 2002 Act.
80. We are deeply concerned by signs that the system
of individual registration is causing a spiral of structural decline
in the electoral register. This appears to occur because every
year only those people who were registered the previous year are
directly canvassed. While people are able to register outside
the canvass periods through rolling registration, the number registering
each year through this mechanism is lower than the number of people
dropping out of the register in canvass registrations from one
year to the next. Consequently, the register has been shrinking
progressively. We believe that the level of electoral registration
in Northern Ireland has now reached the point at which it will
begin to have an adverse effect on public confidence in the integrity
of the process. We have recommended that a full evaluation be
undertaken after the next canvass has been published and corrective
action taken as a matter of priority.
81. Despite these concerns, we believe that the Electoral
Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 has been successful in its main
purpose of bringing about a reduction in electoral fraud and a
restoration of faith in the integrity of the electoral process
among the people of Northern Ireland. However, a great deal more
work needs to be done to fulfil the promise of the Act, in particular
to increase the levels of registration among young people and
vulnerable groups. The present work of the Electoral Commission
and the Electoral Office of Northern Ireland is encouraging, but
this effort needs to be redoubled. It is essential that the Electoral
Office is properly resourced, and that the two institutions work
seamlessly with each other and with other stakeholders in the
political process.
82. The Electoral Commission recommended that
individual registration as well as the abolition of the carry-forward
mechanism should be extended to Great Britain.[97]
In view of the problems identified in this report, we strongly
recommend that the Government follows this advice only once satisfactory
strategies have been put in place in Northern Ireland for alleviating
the problems of under-registration among particular population
groups.
97 Q29, Electoral Commission, Mr Singh Back
| 
