Memorandum by The Conservative Party (VOT
25)
The Conservative Party welcomes the opportunity
to make a submission to the Committee's inquiry into electoral
registration.
LACK OF
CONFIDENCE IN
THE CURRENT
SYSTEM
1. We believe that the standing of the system
of electoral registration in mainland Britain has in recent years
been undermined. We note for example:
— A Sunday Telegraph journalist
was able to apply for the ballot papers of 36 voters to be sent
to a single address for postal voting, without discovery or investigation
by the police or local councils. [55]
— A Daily Mail investigation
found that they were able "to register a fictitious student
called Gus Troobev, an anagram of Bogus Voter, on 31 electoral
registers within just a few hours, and to obtain nine further
bogus votes in the most marginal seat in Britain." [56]
— My colleague, Dame Marion Roe, has
raised a series of practical concerns in the House, [57]including
the fact that electoral registers list thousands of names of people
who no longer occupy the addresses concerned; if all-postal ballots
are sent to these addresses, the risk of fraud is invariably heightened.
In this context, we do not concur with the suggestion
of the Electoral Commission in 2003 that "public confidence
in the integrity of the electoral system in Great Britain is high."
[58]
2. The controversial operation of June 2004's
all-postal pilot schemes has highlighted the inadequacy of the
current electoral roll. We note the Government's questionable
commitment to move ahead with further all-postal voting, in the
face of cross-party concern and independent warnings. In this
context, if further all-postal voting were to be imposed, the
need for reform of electoral registration is immediate.
INDIVIDUAL REGISTRATION
3. Conservatives support the introduction
of individual electoral registration, with the same system as
in operation in Northern Ireland.
4. Northern Ireland switched to individual
household registration following the Electoral Fraud (Northern
Ireland) Act 2002. The Act requires electors to provide their
date of birth, signature and National Insurance number in order
to register and also provide details of any other address at which
they have registered. The National Insurance number is verified
with the NI Social Security Agency. When applying for a postal
vote, electors must provide their date of birth, signature and
NI number. This information is then checked with the records provided
at registration.
5. In the first year of operation, there
was a reduction of 120,000 in the number of people on the register.
We do not believe this was necessarily a retrograde step, given
the significant abuses that may have operated previously under
Northern Ireland's unique political circumstances. As the Electoral
Commission has noted, "we do not agree with the assertion
that 120,000 or so persons were disenfranchised as a result of
the new legislation being introduced".[59]
6. We believe that this system would work
effectively in mainland Britain. Such safeguards would facilitate
telephone or online electoral registration, provided sufficient
security were in place. This is not to imply our support for wholesale
electronic voting—there is a substantive difference between
an online application form, subsequently hand checked, and online
real-time e-voting.
7. We are concerned that the Government
has recently displayed half-hearted support for individual registration,
asserting that "it is concerned about maintaining a simple
and clear system and comprehensive registers".[60]
If a technical system of registration can cut fraud in one part
of the United Kingdom, the Government need to explain why this
system should not be used to cut the potential for fraud in other
parts.
ANONYMITY, PRIVACY
AND PROVISION
OF INFORMATION
TO POLITICAL
PARTIES
8. Political parties have an essential role
in engaging electors in the democratic process, to communicate
their policies, to raise support and funding, to receive feedback
and to encourage people to vote. The system of registration and
the operation of provision of information to parties should recognise
this, whilst respecting people's rights of privacy with regards
the use of such information for commercial purposes.
9. We support the recent changes to increase
the rights of privacy for electors. The introduction of an opt-out
public register and a full register with a limited circulation
has worked well.
10. We are pleased to see the Government
have accepted the introduction of anonymous registration for voters
who can demonstrate a genuine threat to their safety. [61]We
have long argued for this measure, to ensure that those at risk
can still participate in the democratic process.
11. We would support the continuation of
marked registers being provided, especially in any potential all-postal
election. Marked registers can help prevent fraud by avoiding
potential double voting, and assist political parties in increasing
turnout.
12. Notwithstanding, we are concerned that
the Electoral Commission is seeking to undermine the legitimate
provision of absent voting lists to political parties outside
of election time. We note that no political parties were consulted
over the drafting of Circular EC34/2004. [62]
SERVICE PERSONNEL
AND OVERSEAS
VOTERS
13. We believe there is growing disquiet
that the Representation of the People Act 2000 has had an unintentional
effect in reducing electoral registration amongst service personnel.
Prior to the Act, members of the armed services would complete
a service registration card, which remained in force either until
they were discharged or until they took up registration with another
authority.
14. Subsequent to the Act, personnel must
re-register each year, which given the frequent movements of such
personnel has led to a significant reduction in registration and
participation.
15. At the very least, we would support
a diversion of some of the existing central budgets for promoting
electoral registration and participation towards service personnel.
A practical measure, for example, would be for service personnel
and families to be sent a registration form, which they could
fill in or not as they choose, and would be returned to electoral
registration offices via their administration office.
16. With regards the generality of overseas
voters, we would advocate steps to facilitate the registration
and turnout of British citizens who are eligible to vote, comparable
with the steps taken by many other countries. The process of electoral
registration could be made easier by using National Insurance
or passport numbers, instead of the complicated system of verification
at the moment. Rather than relying on unreliable airmail for return
of postal votes, embassies and consulates could be used to receive
postal votes, which then could be returned securely to the UK
via the same process as used for diplomatic mail.
LOCAL VS
CENTRAL ELECTORAL
ADMINISTRATION
17. Conservatives are critical of the significant
increase in local government ring-fenced funding since 1997 and
the growing targets, regulation and burdens imposed on councils
from Whitehall. In this context, we would not support the de
facto centralisation of local electoral registration services
that the Electoral Commission has effectively proposed. [63]
18. We note a tendency by the Commission
in its recommendations to suggest an ever-increasing role for
itself. We are concerned about the over-extension of the Commission's
role from a necessarily separate and independent regulator to
a hands-on administrator, which threatens to compromise its distance
from the operation of elections and would undermine its ability
to make critical judgments on the administration of elections.
19. We would support common data standards
for electoral register data, as proposed in the context of the
CORE project. Central government should oversee the data standards
and more generally, work with local authorities to ensure that
local authorities supply rolling register data to relevant third
parties on time. Notwithstanding, we believe that the ownership
of electoral registers should remain with local authorities and
the funding of electoral services should remain via local authority
grant.
20. We are happy for a representative of
the Party to submit oral evidence and elaborate on any issue of
interest to the Committee.
Oliver Heald MP
Shadow Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs
On behalf of the Conservative Party
55 Sunday Telegraph, 6 June 2004. Back
56
Daily Mail, 7 February 2004. Back
57
Hansard, 5 May 2004, col 442WH onwards. Back
58
Electoral Commission, The electoral registration process:
report and recommendations, May 2003, p27. Back
59
Electoral Commission, The Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland)
Act 2002: An assessment of its first year in operation, December
2003. Back
60
DCA, The Government's Response to The Electoral Commission's
report: Voting for change-An electoral law modernisation programme,
Cm 6426, December 2004, p3. Back
61
Cm 6426, December 2004, p7. Back
62
Hansard, 20 December 2004, col 1333W. Back
63
Electoral Commission, Voting for change-An electoral law modernisation
programme, June 2003, p24-5. Back
| 
