7 Proposals to improve voter turnout
142. We have heard several proposals for how voter
turnout could be increased, and we discuss the most persuasive
of these below. Changes we have considered include:
· Automatic
registration;
· Modernising
electoral administration (for example: weekend voting, voting
anywhere, online voting);
· Improving the
provision of information about elections;
· Non-partisan
"get out the vote" campaigns;
· Citizenship
education, and
· Electoral reform.
Automatic registration
143. We have previously recommended that "it
would be desirable to identify a system whereby those eligible
to vote could be automatically registered",[320]
and we have heard some further arguments that this would
be desirable. Dr Maria Sobolewska told us: "Automatic enrolment
would be the ideal-world scenario in my mind, but that would be
a very costly and very big step in terms of reform."[321]
Sheffield for Democracy's written evidence also called for
automatic registration, stating that this could be linked to "something
like the National Insurance number".[322]
The Government's response to our suggestion that automatic
registration would be desirable was:
The Committee's proposal for automatic registration
would represent a significant shift away from the present system
of elector-led application and voluntary registration, to a system
of automaticity with an opt out. Such a system would present a
number of issues for the electors. As well as the cultural change
this would entail, it would also present potential challenges
in terms of ensuring the accuracy of the electoral register and
its security against fraud, which would require very careful further
consideration.[323]
144. We reaffirm our view that voters should ideally
be registered to vote automatically. The fact that the latest
parliamentary electoral registers were only 85.9% complete and
86% accurate makes a strong case for a system of automatic registration,
which could include the use of the National Insurance number.
We recommend that in its response to this Report the Government
clearly set out its view on moving to a system of automatic registration.
Such a system could operate alongside Individual Electoral Registration.
Modernising electoral administration
145. There are several ways in which current electoral
practices could be modernised to make voting more accessible to
the electorate, and we have been told that "the more opportunities
provided for individuals to vote, the more likely they are to
do so".[324] Phil
Thompson, Research and Evaluation Manager at the Electoral Commission,
told us of some views the Electoral Commission had received from
the public in a recent opinion survey. The results included:
· 70%
of people said they would support weekend voting;
· 65% would support
advance voting in some other way so voting would be stretched
over a number of days, and
· About 63% of
people said they would support the introduction of online voting.[325]
Between 2000 and 2007 several electoral modernisation
pilot schemes were run across the UK, but none have been run since.[326]
WEEKEND OR EXTENDED VOTING
146. Traditionally, elections in the UK are held
on Thursdays; the last general election not to be held on a Thursday
was on Tuesday 27 October 1931. The Fixed-term Parliaments Act
2011 provided for future parliamentary general elections to be
held on first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year following
the previous general election. Elsewhere in Europe it is common
for elections to be held on the weekendfor the recent elections
to the European Parliament, the UK was one of only three countries,
the others being the Netherlands and Ireland, out of the 28 involved
to hold elections on a weekday. Other countries, including the
United States of America, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands and
Ireland hold elections on various weekdays. Several witnesses
and written submissions stated that moving elections to the weekend
could have a positive impact on voter engagement.[327]
Professor Patrick Dunleavy, Co-director of Democratic Audit,
told us:
I think if you look across Europe the
general pattern is that elections that are held on the weekend
have a 10% higher turnout than elections that are held on working
days. We think that is a pretty easy win. It has costs in terms
of higher overtime pay or something like that, but if you were
interested in increasing turnout, that would be a useful thing.[328]
Dr Toby James told us that "There is clear evidence
that if you were to change the day of the election it would bring
about an increase in turnout." He cited research which indicated
that holding elections on the weekend could increase turnout by
between 6.8 and 10%, stating: "You have some variation in
terms of what the research is saying there, but universally the
evidence is that one positive effect would be, it seems, that
more people would vote on a Sunday."[329]
147. However, not everyone was in favour of holding
elections at the weekend. John Turner, Chief Executive of the
AEA, told us that he thought moving elections to a non-weekday
"might encourage a few more people but I think you are talking
about a few more people." He also said that the previous
Government had looked at the proposal and rejected it on the basis
of cost and premises available.[330]
When the previous Government consulted on weekend voting,
they found that a majority (53%) of respondents, and particularly
those with a role in running elections (80%), favoured keeping
elections on a week day.[331]
148. A related suggestion was that polling stations
could be open for several days, possibly including at least one
weekend day.[332] The
evidence we received stated that this would increase the opportunities
people had to participate at an election. One piece of written
evidence, from David Green, took a slightly different view, suggesting
that elections continue to be held on a weekday, but that the
day be made a public holidayto enable greater participation.
It would be easier to plan for having a general election day on
a public holiday in light of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011,
which provided for future elections to be held on the first Thursday
in May every five years. Mr Green stated that the intention of
making election day a bank holiday would be to "make a national
day of voting" so that it was "special".[333]
149. The idea of a "Democracy Day" fits
closely with our view that greater esteem and excitement should
return to the electoral process. We recommend that the
Government explore further proposals for weekend voting, extending
voting and designating election days as public holidays. We acknowledge
the resource implications of some of these proposals, particularly
for rural communities.
VOTING ANYWHERE
150. Another suggestion we heard was that of allowing
voters to cast their vote at any polling station in their local
authority,[334]
or anywhere in the country.[335]
Jessica Garland, Research Officer at the Electoral Reform
Society, told us this was "worth thinking about",[336]
and Dr Toby James also said it would "make a difference",
but noted it would require making changes such as having electronic
poll books.[337]
ONLINE VOTING
151. We have received a significant amount of evidence
in favour of online voting, whereby voters could cast their vote
over the internet. Several submissions from members of the public
and civic groups supported the idea, or stated that it would have
a positive impact on participation.[338]
Others raised concerns about the possibility of fraud, and
difficulties around guaranteeing secrecy.[339]
Phil Thompson, Research and Evaluation Manager at the Electoral
Commission, told us that in a recent survey "half of the
people who didn't vote told us they would have been more likely
to vote if they had been able to vote online",[340]
and the written evidence from Lodestone also indicated that
online voting could be particularly effective at engaging those
people who do not currently vote, as their survey of non-voters
found that "67% of those who didn't vote in 2010 said that
they would be more likely to vote if they could vote online".[341]
152. The National Union of Students stated that online
voting "presents a good opportunity to ensure that democratic
processes better reflect the practices that young people and students
already utilise",[342]
and Toni Pearce, President of the NUS, also told us: "One
of the reasons that online voting is so attractive for me is not
just about encouraging young people to vote but the issue of access,
particularly for disabled people, for being able to vote."[343]
When we took evidence from the University of Sheffield Students'
Union, we heard about how they had moved to a system of online
voting for Union elections in 2009. Online and paper voting were
run concurrently in 2009 and 2010, but as few votes had been cast
by paper in 2010 elections had been exclusively online since 2011.
The impact on turnout had been significant, with an increase in
the number of people voting of over 50% in the first year elections
were run online, and turnout increasing further with each subsequent
year. When surveyed, 85% of students at the University of Sheffield
said they would be more likely to vote in governmental elections
if they were able to do so online.[344]
153. Dr Toby James told us that online voting was
something he could give "lukewarm support" to, as "evidence
has not shown it bringing about a major increase in turnout yet".
That said, he also told us that "times are changing and it
is something we should certainly keep under review".[345]
He did give some suggestions for situations which could encourage
greater take up of online voting, when he referred to previous
pilots in 2003, stating: "what we did see from those pilots
was that where you had internet voting in place in consecutive
elections, more people began to use it. If you had internet voting
open until the close of the poll, at 10 pm, more and more people
would use it."[346]
We also received written evidence from Rushmoor Borough Council,
which was involved in the previous pilots of online voting, outlining
the results of the pilots and suggesting some ways in which future
pilots could be improved. Their experience was that online voting
did not meet their targets for increasing turnout, but was generally
received positively by people who used the system.[347]
154. Concerns we heard about online voting centred
on risks of electoral fraud and problems in guaranteeing secrecy
of the ballot. Professor RA Watt stated that "new (i.e. digital
technologies) are not suitable for introduction into the
remote voting (unsupervised, out of polling station) environment"
as there would be issues around fraud and the secrecy of the ballot
if people were allowed to vote digitally outside of a polling
station.[348]
A written submission from Policy Exchange stated that online
voting could trivialise elections, and that it was also "arguably
[
] inconsistent with the core principle of the secret ballot."[349]
155. In terms of how online voting could be taken
forward, Democratic Audit told us:
We think we should definitely have a sustained,
serious experiment of using online voting on a larger scale than
has been tried before.[350]
Fran O'Leary told us:
we believe that there should be closer interaction
between Government, industry and academics to ensure that any
internet voting systems that are developed are safe, secure and
economical.[351]
However, it does not appear that the current Government
are planning to implement changes such as online voting. When
we questioned Sam Gyimah MP about various proposals that might
improve voter participation, he told us:
Looking at the options that are there, you have
widening the franchise, electronic voting, weekend voting, all
of these have been suggested a number of times over the years.
In my view there are more downsides than upsides.
There are some good arguments for them but I
think at the moment the downsides outweigh the upsides, but then
you would not have talked about online registration 10 years ago
so you never know, their time may come.[352]
156. Online voting is a proposal for increasing
levels of participation that has received strongest support from
our witnesses, although support has not been unanimous. Enabling
electors to cast their vote online if they choose to do so would
make voting significantly more accessible. In light of the move
to IER, and the already high take up of postal voting, there is
scope for giving online voting further consideration, although
this would need to be balanced with concerns about electoral fraud
and secrecy of the ballot. We believe that online voting could
lead to a substantial increase in the level of participation at
UK elections, and we recommend that the Government should come
forward with an assessment of the challenges and likely impact
on turnout, and run pilots in the next Parliament with a view
to all electors having the choice of voting online at the 2020
general election.
POSTAL VOTING
157. In Great Britain, anyone can apply to vote by
postseparate arrangements apply in Northern Ireland. A
number of submissions noted the high levels of participation from
people using postal votes,[353]
although others raised concerns about security and secrecy.[354]
In the 2010 general election 5.5 million valid postal votes were
received, representing just over 18% of the total number of votes
cast.[355] The
percentage of the electorate issued with a postal vote increased
from 4% in 2001 to 15% in 2010. Turnout rates were higher at the
general election for people voting by postal ballot, with 83%
of people who were sent a postal ballot voting, compared with
63% of those who had to vote at a polling station. 96% of electors
who have postal votes in the Tatton Constituency voted at the
last general election, the highest proportion in the country.[356]
Of the 15% of electors who voted in the Police and Crime Commissioners
election almost half of these were postal voters.[357]
Of the 14% of electors who voted in the recent South Yorkshire
by election only 3% voted in the polling station and 11% by postal
voting.[358]
158. As part of the transition to Individual Electoral
Registration, voters with existing postal votes who are matched
as part of the confirmation process or register individually will
keep the postal vote, but otherwise will lose their postal vote
entitlement at the conclusion of the 2014 canvass. Any voter that
loses their entitlement to a postal vote will still be able to
vote in a polling station.[359]
93% of postal voters were confirmed on the electoral register
following data matching, and so will retain their postal vote
entitlement without having to take further action.[360]
159. The extension of the postal vote has been
a success and those who choose to vote by post should be facilitated
to do so. The Committee recognises the importance of postal voting
in increasing democratic participation and calls upon political
parties, Electoral Registration Officers, the Electoral Commission
and the Government to make postal voting more accessible. We note
with concern that under the transitional arrangements for IER,
almost half a million postal voters who were not confirmed automatically
will lose their entitlement to a postal vote if they do not register
under the new system.
All-postal voting
160. Voting at elections exclusively by postal ballot
was piloted in England from 2000 to 2004. The Local Government
Association found from the 2000 pilots that postal voting was
the only new electoral arrangement to have significant potential
for increasing local election turnout,[361]
and the Electoral Commission stated that all-postal voting
increased turnout significantly in some places, but that performance
differed from area to area.[362]
The Electoral Commission told us:
Following the largest all-postal voting pilot
schemes across four English electoral regions at the 2004 local
government and European parliament elections, we noted that turnout
had been just over five percentage points higher in those regions
with all-postal voting than in regions where postal voting was
available on demand in addition to polling stations. We also found,
however, strong public support for retaining the ability for people
to choose to vote in person at a polling station, and therefore
recommended that all-postal voting should not be pursued for use
at future UK statutory elections.[363]
161. We recommend that further trials of all-postal
voting in elections should be held.
CONCLUSION
162. Given its importance to our democracy we
feel that there is a need to revisit electoral administration
on the basis of convenience for electors and no other interest.
Several changes, which have in the past been of academic interest,
including online voting, holding elections on weekends or over
several days, having a "Democracy Day" public holiday
for voting, letting voters cast their vote anywhere in their constituency
and having all-postal votes, are now measures which need to be
considered in the context of improving voter participation. There
is compelling evidence that some of these changes could have a
substantial, positive impact on the levels of voter participation.
Particularly if taken together, these changes could demonstrate
that "the powers that be" are serious about voter engagement.
We recommend that the Government, working with the Electoral
Commission and EROs, bring forward a package of reforms to electoral
arrangements to increase accessibility and turnout, and establish
a series of pilots early in the next Parliament to test the various
proposals that we have considered, with a view to making permanent
changes to electoral arrangements by 2020.
Public awareness and the provision
of information
163. We received a great deal of evidence highlighting
problems with the provision of information and promotion of public
awareness to electors, and calling for improvements to be made.
One of the main points Democratic Audit highlighted in their evidence
to us was that the "information provided to UK voters is
insufficient".[364]
Unlock Democracy Birmingham highlighted similar concerns,
stating in their written evidence: "many members of the public
do not feel they have enough information about the elections to
cast their vote effectively".[365]
Fran O'Leary, Director of Strategy and Innovation at Lodestone,
told us she had been struck by the number of people she had spoken
to who "don't really know how to get on the register",
and that is "not because they are not enthused about the
world, it is that they do not know about the system".[366]
Jenny Watson, Chair of the Electoral Commission, highlighted lack
of awareness as having played a significant role in relation to
voter turnout for the Police and Crime Commissioner elections.
She told us that 37% of the people that did not vote in those
elections gave a reason for not voting that related to a lack
of awareness. She also told us that at the local elections in
May 2014, only 63% of people felt they had enough information
to make an informed choice. She felt there was "enough evidence
there to be clear that lack of awareness was a significant factor
at the elections".[367]
164. Several witnesses and written submissions argued
that it should be possible to provide more and better information
to voters, particularly in light of new technology.[368]
Democratic Audit, in particular, have called for better information
about elections and candidates, and for past results to be made
more accessible.[369]
Professor Patrick Dunleavy argued that there should be a
phone or tablet app that "provides as much information as
it can to make participation attractive."[370]
The Wales Governance Centre made a similar suggestion, stating:
"The development and use of mobile apps by both parties and
the institutions of government should be a priority in engaging
young people in politics and voting."[371]
Some other possibilities for improving the provision of
information to voters include:
· "Voting
advice applications"online election quizzes which
help users find the party that is closest to their political views;[372]
· "An online
forum to enable members of the public to ask the candidates questions
during the lead up to a general election";[373]
· "a weekly
email from the local Council" to registered voters,
and[374]
· Better advertising
of elections on the day.[375]
Lodestone asked a sample of those who did not vote
in the 2010 general election what would be most likely to persuade
them to vote in a UK general election, and over 10% of respondents
highlighted factors relating to information, including:
· "16%
of people saying receiving a leaflet;
· 12% saying
a personal visit from a candidate;
· 12% saying
more information as to how and where you can vote;
· 11% saying
more information on how to get a postal vote, and
· 6% of people
saying receiving an email from a candidate."[376]
165. There is demand for an improvement in the
level and quality of information available to voters, and scope
to improve delivery, particularly through new technology such
as apps and social media. New technology could also be used to
promote public awareness of elections. Some ideassuch as
voting advice applications designed to tell voters which parties
most closely represent their viewswould need to be taken
forward by independent organisations, but others could be pursued
by the Government or the Electoral Commission.
166. We recommend that the Government discuss
with the Electoral Commission and include in its response to this
Report details of arrangements that are currently in place to
provide information to the public about elections and registering
to vote, and bring forward proposals for the effective use of
new technology to better inform the public and increase awareness
of elections. This could include having a central source of information
about election results, and better advertising of elections on
the day. The Government and Electoral Commission should also examine
the changes which can be made to provide more and better information
to voters, and should actively support the work of outside organisations
working to similar goals.
167. Both the Government and Parliament, and not
least select committees, can be even more innovative about the
way they engage with the public, enhancing not superseding our
representative democracy. We note that the Speaker's Commission
on Digital Democracy is looking at proposals in these areas.
'Get out the vote' campaigns
168. In addition to campaigns encouraging people
to register, campaigns encouraging people to voteboth non-partisan
campaigns and those run by political partiescan have a
positive impact on voter participation. Professor Peter John,
of University College London, outlined research that showed that
contacting people in person, by telephone, or by mailshot, encouraging
them to vote could have positive effects on turnout,[377]
and that there were also positive effects for turnout in subsequent
elections, even when there was no further intervention. A submission
from four academics argued that "party campaigning could
be an important part of the solution to low turnout in UK
elections", but noted that parties will always focus their
campaigning in areas where increased votes are likely to provide
an electoral advantage, rather than campaigning equally across
the country.[378]
Professor Susan Banducci told us that "information
and visibility enhances people's sense of engagement in the campaign,
and that motivates them to vote."[379]
169. One suggestion to come out of our informal Outreach
event, on which we subsequently received written evidence, was
that there be "some kind of pin-on token, which voters could
choose to wear when they have voted", so as to make voting
"feel more social".[380]
On a similar point, but in the realm of social media, Dr
Rebecca Rumbul from the Wales Governance Centre, told us that
"positive, small things, such as putting an "I voted"
button on Facebook and having reminders, and seeing that your
friends voted, made a significant difference in voter turnout
among that younger age group."[381]
Citizenship education
170. The importance of providing effective citizenship
education to young people was a theme highlighted as essential
to improving voter engagement in much of the evidence we received.[382]
Suggestions for how citizenship education related to voter
engagement fell into two main categories:
· That
citizenship education should cover the importance of voting, and[383]
· That citizenship
education should cover the practicalities of registering to vote
and participating in elections,[384]
and also how to engage with politics more broadly.[385]
Professor Matt Flinders argued that it was only through
citizenship education that the broader question of political disengagement
could be addressed.[386]
Toni Pearce, President of the NUS, also highlighted the
need to impart understanding of how to vote and the importance
of voting to young people, stating:
Citizenship education and just fundamental understanding
of how voting works and what it means to vote and what it will
be, what the physical act of voting is, doesn't get talked about
and that is a real problem.[387]
Michael Sani, Managing Director of Bite the Ballot,
told us that it was important to start early with the process
of teaching young people about voting:
You might not see the results of our work for
a decade, but what an exciting time when these 14-year-olds hit
24. At 16 they felt empowered to register to vote, and at 18 they
were waiting to vote and play an active role, not just once at
every election but in between, going through the communication
channels to the right people to voice their views and take a stake
in their society. It could be wonderful for our country.[388]
171. Ruth Fox, Director of the Hansard Society, thought
that the focus on voting as being "about people participating
and what they get out of it" was quite worrying, and "what
might be more effective is focusing on the citizen duty element
of it instead".[389]
The New Citizenship Project, a think tank that focuses on
participatory society, also argued that more should be done to
actively promote the "Citizen identity" as a way of
increasing public engagement with elections.[390]
One suggestion of how the focus on citizenship could be applied
was that a "citizenship ceremony" be held where newly
eligible voters were presented with a certificate to commemorate
their becoming able to participate at elections.[391]
172. Effective citizenship education is an important
part of the process of becoming an engaged voter, and should continue
to be a part of the national curriculum. We recommend that
the Department for Education ensure that schools' citizenship
education courses specifically include discussion of the political
and governmental structures of the UK and the electoral systems
that operate in the UK, and also the practicalities of registering
to vote and actually participating at an election. We expect that
Department to respond to this report to indicate progress in this
area.
Electoral reform
173. Several witnesses and written submissions proposed
more substantial reforms to electoral arrangements, or the franchise.
Changes to the UK electoral system that were proposed included:
· Compulsory
voting (including just for first-time voters);
· Reducing the
voting age, and
· Changing the
First Past the Post electoral system.[392]
COMPULSORY VOTING
174. International experience shows that making voting
compulsory results in consistently high election turnout. Countries
such as Australia and Luxembourg, which have compulsory voting,
have had turnout figures of over 90% for recent general elections,
significantly higher than turnout for any UK election in decades.
A number of our written submissions stated that there was a case
for considering compulsory voting,[393]
noting that it would have a substantial positive impact
on turnout. One argument we heard in favour of compulsory voting
was that it was "the only way to ensure that there is no
inequality in turnout".[394]
Others opposed compulsory voting, stating that it would treat
the symptomlow turnoutrather than the underlying
problemwhy people don't vote.[395]
A written submission from Dr Nick Anstead and Professor Sonia
Livingstone also noted that "compulsory voting would be politically
very difficult to introduce in a country where it has no precedent."[396]
175. A specific proposal that was made to us by the
IPPR was that voting should be made compulsory for first-time
voters. Their proposal was that "young people who are eligible
at their first election to vote will be required to go out and
vote" so that "they develop this habit and they will
do so at subsequent elections ".[397]
The written evidence submitted by the IPPR stated that this
would "go a significant way toward breaking the habit of
non-voting that often gets passed from generation to generation,
and could have a substantial and lasting impact on turnout."[398]
A similar proposal was suggested by Sandwell Metropolitan Borough
Councilstating that voting should be compulsory for 16-18
year olds.[399]
Glenn Gottfried told us he believed that making voting compulsory
for first time voters "will help alleviate the problem of
turnout over time." However, several witnesses opposed treating
first-time voters differently from other people.[400]
176. A number of written submissions recommended
that there be an option for "none of the above" on the
ballot paper if voting were made compulsoryso that people
were not compelled to vote for one of the candidates standing
for electionand others supported the option of voting formally
for "none of the above" on the ballot paper, whether
voting was compulsory or not.[401]
A written submission from Nota UK stated that being able
to vote for "none of the above" would allow people to
actively withhold consent from the parties standing for election.[402]
Being able to vote for none of the above was the most popular
choice by 38 Degrees members in their survey of "What would
make you more likely to vote in the 2015 General Election?",
picked by over 18,000 of the 84,000 respondents.[403]
177. International experience demonstrates conclusively
that making voting a mandatory civic duty ensures that the vast
majority of eligible voters participate in elections. Making voting
compulsory is not the sole solution to voter engagement or to
political engagement more broadly. Some members of the Committee
believe there is now a strong case for including it in a package
of measures to meet the threat of disengagement, though provision
for those who wish not to take part should be respected by including
an abstention provision on the ballot. However, other members
believe that voting should not, as a matter of principle, be made
compulsory, and that people should be free not to participate
at elections if they so choose. We recommend that the Government
report to the House setting out how a system of compulsory voting
could operate in the UK, including an assessment of international
experience, and an assessment of whether voting should only be
compulsory for certain types of election. This would mark
the start of a public debate. If the 2015 Parliament were to agree,
compulsory voting could operate at the following general election.
If Parliament did not agree the current system would continue.
178. We recommend that, in the event that voting
in certain elections is made compulsory, an option to vote "none
of the above" or to "abstain" should be one of
the options set out. These options could also be included
even if voting were not compulsory.
ALTERNATIVE ELECTORAL SYSTEMS
179. The written evidence from the Electoral Reform
Society stated: "The results of UK general elections have
become increasingly disproportional in the translation of votes
to seats, and produce majorities far in excess of votes received",
and goes on to say that "Without changing the voting system [
] the
culture of politics at Westminster is unlikely to change."[404]
A significant number of submissions called for the implementation
of some form of the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system,[405]
where voters rank candidates so that results can more closely
reflect the preferences of voters. STV Action, a group dedicated
to campaigning for use of the Single Transferable Vote election
system (STV) for all public elections in the UK, stated that STV
would allow voters to "vote positively for named candidates"
and make votes "more positive".[406]
That said, we noted earlier the benefits that some people have
argued the First Past the Post voting system provides. Of those
calling for STV, many stated that it should be used initially
for local government elections.
180. Other submissions did not favour particular
reforms, but recommended there be greater public debate about
possible changes to the electoral system.[407]
For example, Dr Stephen Barber stated that an "independent,
intelligent, evidenced, public debate about the merits and demerits
of alternative systems set in the terms of engagement can only
be a positive discussion."[408]
Unlock Democracy stated that there is "significant evidence
that more proportional voting systems are linked with higher turnout
(3-7%)".[409]
A number of other submissions also called for an electoral system
that was more proportional than First Past the Post, or noted
that such systems were shown to increase turnout.[410]
Other electoral systems were also suggested.[411]
181. Westminster has a settled view on First Past
the Post. The more that centralisation gives way to devolution,
the more that electors at the level of the nations, regions or
localities will wish to exercise choice over their electoral systems.
We accept that democratic institutions outside Whitehall, be they
Parliaments, Assemblies or institutions in localities, will increasingly
be the place where the debate about their own electoral systems
should take place and be decided and that this will have a positive
impact on engagement and participation.
REDUCING THE VOTING AGE TO 16
182. Only people aged 18 and over are eligible to
vote in UK elections, although people aged 16 and 17 are able
to register to vote if they will turn 18 during the period the
register is in force. 16 and 17 year olds were allowed to vote
in the UK for the first time in the referendum on Scottish independence,
held on 18 September 2014. Turnout for the referendum as a whole
was 84.6%, though data on how many 16 and 17 year olds voted at
the referendum is not available.
183. Several of our witnesses argued in favour of
extending the vote to 16 and 17 year olds. Professor Sarah Birch
and Professor Paul Whitely stated that research on extending the
franchise to 16 and 17 year olds suggested that it would be likely
to increase youth turnout in the short term, and could also increase
overall turnout in the medium to long term.[412]
We also received a written submission from the Hon Stephen Charles
Rodan SHK, Speaker of the House of Keys, Isle of Man, where the
franchise was extended to 16 and 17 year olds in 2011. The experience
in the Isle of Man was that 35% of eligible 16 and 17 year olds
registered to vote, and turnout of the registered voters at the
next election was 60.2%very close to the turnout figure
for the electorate as a whole. The rate of registration for this
age group had since risen to 60.1%. The Speaker of the House of
Keys stated that he remains "firmly of the view that 16-year-olds
should be entitled to vote as a matter of principle in any case",
and also notes that many Keys candidates now make reference to
young peoples' issues in their manifestos, and he says it is arguable
whether this would have been the case if the voting age had remained
18.[413]
184. A written submission from Harry Barnes, a former
MP, also argued in favour of extending the franchise to 16 and
17 year olds on the basis that this would make it much easier
to achieve almost 100% registration rates of those people who
would become eligible to vote during the period an electoral register
was in force, by registering them at school.[414]
The Electoral Reform Society took a similar view, stating
that "Early registration should be implemented alongside
lowering the voting age to 16", as this would "allow
a seamless transition from learning about voting, elections and
democracy to putting such knowledge into practice".[415]
Extending the franchise to 16 and 17 year olds was also
supported by Democratic Audit,[416]
the NUS,[417]
Dr Elin Weston and LLB Advanced Constitutional Law students at
King's College London,[418]
and the Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform.[419]
185. Professor Jonathan Tonge and Dr Andrew Mycock
made the point that because voting is habit forming, if the franchise
were extended to 16 and 17 year olds, it would be important that
they actually exercise their right to vote. To that end, they
stated that consideration needed to be given to the broader question
of political literacy of young people when considering extending
the franchise.[420]
186. We have received a significant amount of
evidence that extending the franchise to 16 and 17 year olds could
have a positive impact not just on voter engagement for young
people, but also on voter engagement overall in the medium to
long term. We as a Committee take no view on whether the franchise
should be extended, but recommend that Parliament leads a national
discussion on this matter and that a motion on the issue is brought
forward in 2015 to allow the House of Commons a free vote on its
view, with a view to the introduction of legislation if appropriate.
320 Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill,
HC 437, Third Report of Session 2010-11, October 2010 Back
321
Q346 [Dr Maria Sobolewska] Back
322
Written evidence from Sheffield for Democracy [VUK 93] Back
323
Government response to the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee's Report on the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill,
Cm 7997, March 2011 Back
324
Written evidence from Professor Ailsa Henderson [VUK 38] Back
325
Q578 [Phil Thompson] Back
326
Written evidence from the Electoral Commission [VUK 40] Back
327
Written evidence from the Birmingham 'Success' Group [VUK 37],
Professor Ailsa Henderson [VUK 38], Sandwell Metropolitan Borough
Council [VUK 49], Charles Harvey [VUK 138], Dr Nick Anstead and
Professor Sonia Livingstone OBE [VUK 149] Back
328
Q70 [Professor Dunleavy] Back
329
Q241 [Dr Toby James] Back
330
Q300 [John Turner] Back
331
Election Day: Weekend Voting, Ministry of Justice, March 2010 Back
332
Written evidence from Dr Elin Weston and LLB Advanced Constitutional
Law students, King's College London [VUK 33], Professor Ailsa
Henderson [VUK 38], I Miller [VUK 119], Dr Nick Anstead and Professor
Sonia Livingstone OBE [VUK 149], Labour Campaign for Electoral
Reform [VUK 152] Back
333
Written evidence from David Green [VUK 91] Back
334
Written evidence from Dr Elin Weston and LLB Advanced Constitutional
Law students, King's College London [VUK 33], Dr Nick Anstead
and Professor Sonia Livingstone OBE [VUK 149] Back
335
Written evidence from Sheffield for Democracy [VUK 93] Back
336
Q135 [Jessica Garland] Back
337
Q239 [Dr Toby James] Back
338
Written evidence from the Bradford Children in Care Council [VUK 02],
Andrew Jones [VUK 10], Democratic Audit [VUK 20], Andy Tye [VUK 84],
Lynne Armstrong [VUK 106], I Miller [VUK 119], Labour Campaign
for Electoral Reform [VUK 152] Back
339
Written evidence from RA Watt [VUK 24], Policy Exchange [VUK 83] Back
340
Q578 [Phil Thompson] Back
341
Written evidence from Lodestone [VUK 101] Back
342
Written evidence from the NUS [VUK 34] Back
343
Q195 [Toni Pearce] Back
344
Written evidence from the University of Sheffield Students' Union
[VUK 86] Back
345
Q231 [Dr Toby James] Back
346
Q239 [Dr Toby James] Back
347
Written evidence from Rushmoor Borough Council [VUK 123] Back
348
Written evidence from Professor RA Watt [VUK 24] Back
349
Written evidence from Policy Exchange [VUK 83] Back
350
Q70 [Professor Dunleavy] Back
351
Q491 [Fran O'Leary] Back
352
Qq 837, 839 [Sam Gyimah MP] Back
353
Written evidence from Professor Andrew Russell [VUK 25], Dr Nick
Anstead and Professor Sonia Livingstone [VUK 149] Back
354
Written evidence from Hugh Eveleigh [VUK 01], Unlock Democracy
[VUK 18], Professor RA Watt [VUK 24], Professor Stephen D Fisher
[VUK 35], Policy Exchange [VUK 83], David Green [VUK 91], Dr Nick
Anstead and Professor Sonia Livingstone [VUK 149] Back
355
Report on the administration of the 2010 general election, Electoral
Commission, July 2010 Back
356
UK General Election 2010 data, Electoral Commission, May 2010 Back
357
Police and Crime Commissioner elections in England and Wales,
Electoral Commission, March 2013 Back
358
Labour win South Yorkshire police commissioner poll, BBC News,
31 October 2014 Back
359
Individual Electoral Registration guidance: Part 5 - Absent voting,
Electoral Commission, September 2013 Back
360
Analysis of the confirmation live run in England and Wales, Electoral
Commission, October 2014 Back
361
Elections - the 21st Century Model: an evaluation of May 2000
localelectoral pilots, Local Government Association Back
362
Modernising Elections A Strategic Evaluation of the 2002 Pilot
Schemes, Electoral Commission, August 2002 Back
363
Written evidence from the Electoral Commission [VUK 40] Back
364
Written evidence from Democratic Audit [VUK 20] Back
365
Written evidence from Unlock Democracy Birmingham [VUK 143] Back
366
Q492 [Fran O'Leary] Back
367
Q565 [Jenny Watson] Back
368
Written evidence from Andy Tye [VUK 84] Back
369
Q57 [Professor Dunleavy] Back
370
Q67 [Professor Dunleavy] Back
371
Written evidence from the Wales Governance Centre [VUK 15] Back
372
Voting advice applications promote political engagement and an informed electorate,
LSE, 20 May 2014, written evidence from Unlock Democracy [VUK 18] Back
373
Written evidence from Thomas Quinton [VUK 163] Back
374
Written evidence from Cybersalon.org [VUK 29] Back
375
Written evidence from J R Attar [VUK 89] Back
376
Written evidence from Lodestone [VUK 101] Back
377
Written evidence from Professor Peter John [VUK 16] Back
378
Written evidence submitted by Charles Pattie, Ron Johnston, David
Cutts, and Laura Palfreyman [VUK 19] Back
379
Q644 [Professor Susan Banducci] Back
380
Written evidence from Michael Andrews [VUK 96] Back
381
Q633 [Dr Rebecca Rumbul] Back
382
Written evidence from Dr Kaat Smets [VUK 21], Myplace Project
[VUK 23], Mark Ryan [VUK 31], Dr Elin Weston and LLB Advanced
Constitutional Law students, King's College London [VUK 33], Keith
Best [VUK 117], Gary Stewart [VUK 118], Bite the Ballot [VUK 153] Back
383
Written evidence from the Bradford Children in Care Council [VUK 02] Back
384
Written evidence from Dr Elin Weston and LLB Advanced Constitutional
Law students, King's College London [VUK 33] Back
385
Written evidence from Democracy Matters [VUK 112] Back
386
Written evidence from Professor Matt Flinders [VUK 06] Back
387
Q184 [Toni Pearce] Back
388
Q222 [Michael Sani] Back
389
Q83 [Ruth Fox] Back
390
Written evidence from New Citizenship Project [VUK 155] Back
391
Written evidence from David Green [VUK 91] Back
392
Written evidence from Mark Ryan [VUK 31], Dr Elin Weston and LLB
Advanced Constitutional Law students, King's College London [VUK 33],
David H Smith [VUK 59], Morgan Dalton [VUK 75] Back
393
Written evidence from Professor Stephen D Fisher [VUK 35], Birmingham
'Success' Group [VUK 37], Michael Yates [VUK 53], Malcolm Morrison
[VUK 68], Liam Hardy [VUK 109], I Miller [VUK 119] Back
394
Q35 [Glenn Gottfried] Back
395
Written evidence from Nota UK [VUK 61], STV Action [VUK 114] Back
396
Written evidence from Dr Nick Anstead and Professor Sonia Livingstone
[VUK 149] Back
397
Q35 [Glenn Gottfried] Back
398
Written evidence from the IPPR [VUK 14] Back
399
Written evidence from Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council [VUK 49] Back
400
Q62 [Professor Dunleavy], Q104 [Hansard Society], Q113 [Jessica
Garland], Q204 [Toni Pearce] Back
401
Q377 [Nigel Slack], written evidence from 38 Degrees [VUK 50],
Michael Yates [VUK 53], Nota UK [VUK 61], Malcolm Morrison [VUK 68],
I Miller [VUK 119] Back
402
Written evidence from Nota UK [VUK 61] Back
403
Written evidence from 38 Degrees [VUK 50] Back
404
Written evidence from Electoral Reform Society [VUK 17] Back
405
Written evidence from Ian Sheppard [VUK 51], Thomas G F Gray [VUK 67],
Malcolm Morrison [VUK 68], Richard Lung [VUK 77], Peter Ivorson
[VUK 79], David Green [VUK 91], Dr David Hill [VUK 99], Anthony
Tuffin [VUK 105], Canon Michael Hodge [VUK 108], Colin Buchanan
[VUK 110], Arthur C James [VUK 111], Keith Underhill [VUK 113],
STV Action [VUK 114], Make Votes Count in West Sussex [VUK 115],
Keith Best [VUK 117], John E Strafford [VUK 134], Michael Meadowcroft
[VUK 135], Brian Wichmann [VUK 145], Dr AEL Davis [VUK 147] Back
406
Written evidence from STV Action [VUK 114], Make Votes Count in
West Sussex [VUK 115] Back
407
Written evidence from 4 Freedoms Party (UK EPP)/British Committee
of the European People's Party [VUK 146] Back
408
Written evidence from Dr Stephen Barber [VUK 12] Back
409
Written evidence from Unlock Democracy [VUK 18] Back
410
Written evidence from Dr Elin Weston and LLB Advanced Constitutional
Law students, King's College London [VUK 33], Professor Stephen
D Fisher [VUK 35], Sheffield for Democracy [VUK 93 and VUK 124],
Lynne Armstrong [VUK 106], John E Strafford [VUK 134], Unlock
Democracy Birmingham [VUK 143], David Bernard [VUK 144] Back
411
Written evidence from Tim Knight [VUK 69 and VUK 131] Back
412
Written evidence from Professors Sarah Birch and Paul Whitely
[VUK 08] Back
413
Written evidence from Hon Stephen Charles Rodan SHK, Speaker of
the House of Keys, Isle of Man [VIUK 90] Back
414
Written evidence from Harry Barnes [VUK 13] Back
415
Written evidence from the Electoral Reform Society [VUK 17] Back
416
Written evidence from Democratic Audit [VUK 20] Back
417
Written evidence from the NUS [VUK 34] Back
418
Dr Elin Weston and LLB Advanced Constitutional Law students, King's
College London [VUK 33] Back
419
Written evidence from the Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform
[VUK 152] Back
420
Written evidence from Professor Jonathan Tonge and Dr Andrew Mycock
[VUK 05] Back
|