8 Draft electoral administration provisions
The Government's proposals
90. On 13 July and 14 September 2011, the Government
published two sets of draft provisions including a number of electoral
administration provisions for pre-legislative scrutiny. [97]
The draft provisions requiring primary legislation would:
extend the electoral timetable for UK Parliamentary
elections from 17 to 25 working days, and, in doing so, adjust
a number of the deadlines within the timetable (in particular
the date for delivery of nominations which are fixed at the start
of the electoral timetable). This will allow more time for the
postal vote process and to facilitate the administration of elections
more generally;
make changes to the timing of polling place reviews
in Great Britain to bring them in line with the proposals to set
Parliamentary terms to five-year periods, and the five year cycle
for UK boundary reviews implemented by the Parliamentary Voting
Systems and Constituencies Act 2011;
address an oversight in existing legislation to enable
a UK Parliamentary election candidate jointly nominated by two
or more registered political parties to use on the ballot paper
an emblem registered by one of the nominating parties; and
change the law so that a parish or community council
election may be held on the ordinary day of election of councillors
even if this is also the date of a Parliamentary or European Parliamentary
election.
91. Draft provisions that could be achieved through
secondary legislation would:
require EROs to check 100% of the identifiers for
postal votes at elections; and
extend the 'emergency' proxy voting facility to enable
those called away on business or military service unexpectedly,
and at short notice, before an election, to appoint a proxy to
vote on their behalf (as well as people unexpectedly called ill).
92. The proposals published in July have been
widely supported. We have had only a very limited opportunity
to test the proposals published in September. Some witnesses
argued that the draft provisions did not go far enough, with Bristol
City Council stating that they would welcome any further extension
to the timetable for parliamentary elections.[98]
Dr Orford, Professor Rallings, and Professor Thrasher cited research
that distance to polling places can affect the number of votes
cast there, and called for a review of the distance of polling
places.[99] The Electoral
Commission has also raised a number of questions and concerns
about the detail of the Government's proposals from July, in particular:
a) why the Government is "proposing that
the election timetable should continue to be counted forward from
the dissolution of Parliament, rather than calculating deadlines
backwards from polling day". This may be to allow for the
possibility of an early general election, consistent with the
Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011;
b) why the Government is "proposing greater
flexibility for the timetable for Parliamentary by-elections and
polls which are re-run due to the death of a candidate, including
flexibility for the Acting Returning Officer over the setting
of polling day"; and
c) whether the Government will "amend the
rules to allow an earlier dispatch of postal ballot packs than
that which is possible under the current timetable, or explain
why it does not intend to make such a change". This seems
a matter of particular importance if overseas voters are to have
a realistic opportunity of exercising their postal vote.[100]
93. The Government has also asked for views on two
further possible reforms which are not currently proposed: for
appointing polling and counting agents, and to shorten the deadlines
for postal vote applications. The first proposal is suggested
"in the context of the proposal to extend the electoral timetable".[101]
John Turner, Chief Executive of the Association of Electoral Administrators,
doubted whether changing the deadline for postal vote applications
would ease pressures around the process for issuing postal votes,
suggesting that with a different deadline "you can just create
another period of pressure".[102]
We would be concerned at any change that made it harder for people
to vote. We recommend keeping the deadline for postal vote
applications at eleven days before polling day.
94. Finally, the Government has asked for views on
the possibility of amending the Recess Elections Act 1975. At
present, under this Act a writ may not be issued in recess for
vacancies that arise where a Member effectively resigns their
seat by applying for one of the sinecure offices of the Crown
Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds or of the Manor of
Northstead.[103] This
provision, which originally dates from the 1850s, seems likely
to us to be a historical anomaly. In our view, the principle should
be that constituents should be left unrepresented for as little
time as possible. Unless strong evidence should emerge to the
contrary, we recommend that the Recess Elections Act should be
amended to allow writs to be issued in recess for any vacancies
that arise where a Member effectively resigns their seat.
95. The Electoral Commission has also stated that
it is "disappointed with the lack of policy context alongside
the draft provisions. The explanatory notes do not provide enough
background or evidence to support appropriately detailed consideration
of these proposals".[104]
Publication of the proposals in two tranches has also not helped
in attempting to understand the Government's overall rationale.
96. The provisions published in draft by the Government
are largely technical, but the Government needs to be able to
explain why it is making the package of proposals that it is,
and why it is not taking forward other proposals for change in
electoral law, particularly those put forward by the Electoral
Commission.
Other possible changes
97. In addition to the Government's proposals, the
Electoral Commission has raised a number of areas of law that
they believe could be usefully changed. These include:
a) allowing eligible electors in the queue at
close of poll to vote;
b) giving Returning Officers powers to request
a fresh identifying signature from those voting by post (as currently
many postal votes are rejected because a voter's signature has
changed since their first application);
c) allowing academics access to the full register
for research purposes; and
d) considering requiring electors to show identification
at polling stations in Great Britain.[105]
Voters must already show such identification in Northern Ireland.
98. On the issue of close of poll the Minister set
out the Government's position that the issues around close of
poll in the 2010 election were "largely around poor planning,
poor resource management" and that an attempt to legislate
in this area could create more problems than it solved.[106]
We agree with the Minister that in this area careful planning
and allocation of resources are likely to be more effective in
ensuring all those who are eligible can access their vote without
resorting to legislation.
99. The Committee also received written evidence
from a number of expatriates calling for the Government to abolish
the current 15 year limit on voting in General Elections when
living overseas. Mark Harper responded that it was "something
that Government is considering at the moment, but we have not
reached a decision".[107]
100. We recommend that in its response to this
Report, the Government set out its position on each of the Electoral
Commission's proposals for further reform of electoral administration
law.
97 Cabinet Office, Draft electoral administration
provisions, July 2011, Cm 8150, and Further draft electoral
administration provisions, September 2011, Cm 8177 Back
98
Ev w3 Back
99
Ev w1 Back
100
Ev 108 Back
101
Ev 111 Back
102
Q 181 Back
103
Ev 113 Back
104
Ev 107 Back
105
Ev 109 Back
106
Q 284 Back
107
Q 283 Back
| 
