5 ELECTRONIC FORMS OF REGISTRATION
101. Historically, the only means of registering
for electoral purposes has been by completing a paper form which
is then passed back to the local ERO. Today, when many people
turn first to electronic means, either the telephone or the internet,
to carry out transactions of all kinds, this reliance on paper
seems increasingly anachronistic and time-consuming. In itself,
this may discourage some from returning the form. It also makes
the system less accessible than it needs to be for voters and
harder work for EROs in transcribing forms onto a computer than
would be the case with submissions from electors in electronic
form, although paper has the advantage that it provides a record
if properly managed and stored.
102. There have been some limited moves recently
to increase the use of technology in electoral registration. During
the annual canvass, some local authorities permit households to
record that there are no changes to the information on Form A
by automated telephone systems or the internet. The memorandum
from the Department for Constitutional Affairs and ODPM reports
that these authorities have found that up to a third of households
respond using these methods, with the result that they have earned
"positive elector feedback" and "cut down considerably
on the administration involved in running the annual canvass".[228]
Away from the annual canvass, the Electoral Commission issues
a registration form via its website with details of the relevant
local authority to which it must be submitted in each case but
these forms must then be printed off, signed and posted to the
local ERO. This does encourage registration during the year but
it does more to indicate the potential of an electronic system
than to exploit the advantages currently offered by the internet.
103. The Electoral Commission has recommended to
the Government that "electoral registers should be universally
electronically maintained according to mandatory national standards".[229]
It further recommended that access to registration be broadened
by enabling electronic, online registration and in extending the
opportunities for telephone registration in order to log changes
in registration details.[230]
These recommendations were made dependent upon the introduction
of individual registration and subject to piloting before national
implementation.[231]
In its evidence to us the Commission expanded on the advantages
it claimed for an electronic on line register. These are fourfold:
An electronic register is logistically and practically
the only sensible way of achieving a national register (see section
VI below)
It would facilitate the introduction of greater
choice for electors in voting location. Paper-based records do
not allow checks for duplication to be made except at a single
polling station but electronic records, updated in real time,
would allow a voter to vote at any polling station anywhere
It would facilitate greater access to voting
for disabled people by enabling them to vote at the most accessible
polling station
It would facilitate the further development of
rolling registration by enabling the register to be continuously
updated, enhancing the security and accuracy of the register.[232]
104. These are worthwhile goals in their own right,
and the Commission's view of the advantages to be offered by electronic
registration was shared by many of those who submitted evidence
to our inquiry.[233]
One group of Liberal Democrat and Labour party councillors pointed
out that "the flexibility of IT will enable the registration
process to be linked to a variety of Council applications and
marketing tools" and that "the reduction in paper, postage
and staff resources will be substantial".[234]
Those who raised concerns about electronic registration did so
more in the form of cautions than as arguments to prevent its
development. For example, the Association of Electoral Administrators
accepted that "in time people will expect [electronic application]
to be the main registration method" and agreed that it "can
be faster, more efficient and cost-effective".[235]
Yet they also pointed out that there could be "concerns
about accuracy and whether the system and data provided remains
secure" and "issues relating to data protection and/or
human rights over these practices".[236]
Finally, Sense, like others representing people with disabilities,
saw advantages in widening the choice of registration methods,
but stressed that "it is important that people without access
to the internet, or who find electronic systems daunting, can
continue to register using a paper form".[237]
105. We questioned the Deputy Information Commissioner
on the concerns expressed which fell within his authority. He
informed us that the only data protection implication was that
"you should identify people as well as you can" and
that the Commissioner's Office was "in principle, in favour"
of electronic registration.[238]
As to the other warnings about accuracy and security, it is clear
that measures must be built into the system itself and into the
way in which it is implemented to ensure that potential difficulties
are overcome. There are particular concerns arising if electors
are allowed to amend their own records on line, rather than submitting
the data for the ERO to add to the register. While the former
method is faster, it is less subject to verification and more
likely to lead to inaccuracy or fraud. Secure means of identifying
those submitting the data also need to be established in order
to maintain the accuracy of the register and public confidence
in the integrity of the system.
106. The difficulty is that the security of electronic
forms of registration can only be provided through the use of
personal identifiers collected under some form of individual registration.
As the Electoral Commission told us, "How one would [deal
with the security implications] outside individual registration
becomes much more complicated, much less easy to see".[239]
The Government accepts that this is the case: "in the absence
of a system that gathers unique voter identifiers ... it is more
difficult to extend these forms of registration while maintaining
a proper balance between increased convenience and a high level
of security".[240]
Having declared itself in favour of electronic registration and
yet against the introduction of individual registration at this
time, the Department for Constitutional Affairs and ODPM could
only commit to "take these issues forward through an existing
working group made up of electoral administrators and officials
from Government and the Electoral Commission".[241]
In oral evidence, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department
for Constitutional Affairs, added that "a lot of those more
mechanical improvements depend upon the IT available, depend upon
whether we have a single telephone line for the whole country
or one for each local authority, much of that leads into the online
registration project experience."[242]
107. We are
disappointed that no way has been found to exploit the potential
advantages of electronic registration which would be welcomed
by many electors and administrators as a major step forward in
modernising the whole electoral process. Without electronic registers,
many of the benefits of accessibility to both registration and
remote voting will be lost, or at least delayed until such time
as an acceptable means of gathering personal data for identification
purposes has been devised. We note that electronic registers already
exist for each council; it is the integration of this facility
with on-line access which needs to be developed further. We
should like to see much greater emphasis placed by the Government
on the development of a secure system for electronic registration
by telephone and on-line. We recommend that once that system is
devised, it be implemented through a series of pilot programmes
designed to test its integrity and that it be rolled out nationally
only once independent auditors are satisfied with the security
of the system. We further recommend that paper forms be retained
alongside electronic registration to ensure that the availability
of the latter widens accessibility rather than narrows it. Paper
forms may also need to be retained in instances where a signature
is regarded as essential to the security of a particular method
of voting. In such cases it should be made clear that it is not
necessary for electors to provide a signature on each occasion
that they re-register; a five-yearly check should be sufficient.
228 Ev 3, para 23 , HC243-II [DCA/ODPM] Back
229 The
Electoral Commission, The electoral registration process,
May 2003, para 3.5 Back
230
Ibid, para 3.18 Back
231
Ibid Back
232
Ev 13, para 8.2-8.5 , HC243-II [Electoral Commission] Back
233
Eg Scope and the Pollen Shop, Ev 37; Experian, Ev 41, HC243-II
Back
234
Ev 35, para 2(d) , HC243-II [Southampton City Council Liberal
Democrat Group and Southampton City Council Labour Group] Back
235
Ev 33, HC243-II [Association of Electoral Administrators] Back
236
Ibid Back
237
Ev 17, para 10, HC243-II [Scope] Back
238
Qq67, 69 [Mr Aldhouse] Back
239
Q19 [Mr Younger] Back
240
Ev 3, para 25, HC243-II [DCA/ODPM] Back
241
Ev 3, paras 25-6 , HC243-II [DCA/ODPM] Back
242
Q326 [Mr Leslie] Back
|
