Gould Report on the Scottish elections
From Democracywiki
Central Lobby
The Electoral Commission’s report into the Scottish Elections which took place on the 3rd of May 2007 is published in two sections. The first which is explored below, is an independent review team’s report on the aspects of the election identified by the commission on the 4th of May 2007, led by Ron Gould.
The second deals with a range of factual and technical details which were specifically not included in the review team’s terms of reference. A summary of this report can be found here
The election held on 3rd of May used two different systems of voting. The Additional Member System (AMS) was used for the parliamentary election and the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system was used for the first time in the local government elections.
There were also changes to the design of the ballot paper. For the first time voters in the parliamentary election (using AMS) were to complete two ballot papers printed on a single sheet, each marked with a cross. On a separate ballot paper, for the local government elections (using STV), voters were to indicate their candidate preference with numbers.
- There were more than two million votes cast for each of the elections
- For the Parliamentary elections 2.88% regional ballot papers were rejected and 4.075% constituency ballot papers were rejected. This was significantly higher than those rejected in 2003 (which were 0.65% and 0.66% respectively).
- For the local government elections 1.83% of ballots were rejected (compared to 0.64% in 2003).
the report notes that:
- “While the results of the elections were ultimately accepted by the political parties and candidates, there was an accompanying outcry from them, from the media and from the voting public with respect to the large number of rejected ballot papers and other election-related problems that were subsequently identified.”
The Electoral Commission requested seven areas to be investigated:
- the reasons for the high number of rejected ballot papers;
- the electronic counting process and its impact on the final results;
- the arrangements for the production and dispatch of postal ballot packs;
- the decision to combine the parliamentary and local government elections;
- the decision to electronically count both the local and the parliamentary ballot papers;
- where the decision-making in relation to these issues did take place and where it should have, either according to law or to responsibility; and
- the role of the Electoral Commission itself in the preparations for the elections.
From the Electoral Commission’s requests, the independent review focused upon seven key issues, and found the following:
Contents |
Legislation
The report highlights the antiquated and fragmented nature of electoral law across the United Kingdom, which presents a “challenging environment” for those involved in planning and implementing elections. This is further complicated in Scottish context by the split in responsibilities between the UK Government and Scottish Executive. It proposes:
- A consolidation and rationalisation of legislation
- New provisions coming into force are not applicable to elections for six months.
Roles, relationships and accountability
The report notes that the roles of, and interactions between, stakeholders in the election were extremely fragmented to the extent that “their efforts to achieve problem-free elections were hindered at almost every stage of the process”.
It proposes:
- Establishing a Chief Returning Officer (CRO) for Scotland
- Professionalising Returning Officer positions in each consistency
- Rationalising the role of the Electoral Commission and other stakeholders in relation to the proposed Chief Returning Officer for Scotland
If a CRO for Scotland is created, the report recommends that all operational roles of the Electoral Commission are transferred, with the Commission retaining only an audit and advisory role.
Planning and timing
From comments received, the report reaches the conclusion that there was little time to adequately implement changes as there was no effective planning process or document connecting the legislative timetables to operational timetables. It also criticises the Scotland Office and the Scottish Executive for being too focused upon partisan interests when carrying out their responsibilities, overlooking voter interests and realities within the timetable.
It proposes:
- A strengthened future Elections Steering Group (ESG), tasked with providing integrated plans and timetables, chaired by the CRO and including representatives from the Electoral Commission
The combination of the Scottish parliamentary and local government elections
The report considered arguments for and against combining elections. It concluded that despite the cost saving benefits and increased voter turnout of a single election process, it is more important that voters engage with the campaign in a meaningful manner. “Combined elections are not only a disservice to the local councils and candidates but also to the electorate as well”.
It proposes either:
- The preferred option of separating parliamentary elections from local elections by a period of two years, or
- Maintaining combined elections, but ensuring that the casting of votes is markedly differentiated for each ballot.
Ballot papers and voting issues
The report is clear that months of partisan discussion and debate were wasted, which could have been used to establish a ballot paper that voters would find easy to understand. Legislation and political involvement in the finalising of ballot papers left too much scope for “political micro-management”, with a negative impact on the electoral process. One of the issues singled out was the use of ‘naming strategies’ to influence the listing of parties either alphabetically or with a high profile name in the description.
About 3% of voters had only marked one of the two ballots in the parliamentary elections (using AMS) which accounted for a large number of the spoiled ballots. The report is critical of the fact that the overall rejection rate of 4% for the actual parliamentary election was mirrored in the ballot paper study conducted prior to the introduction of a single ballot sheet. It is stated that present provisions for postal voting do not allow sufficient time for the printing of postal ballots after nominations have closed for voters to receive them early enough to return them.
It proposes:
- Registered names of political parties appear first on all regional ballot papers
- A public lottery to be held in order to determine the positioning of parties on the sheet
- Separate sheets for regional and constituency ballot papers
- Consideration of other advance voting strategies (such as those in Sweden and Canada), to supplement postal voting
- Readying returned postal ballots in advance (possibly even counting them) to the greatest extent possible.
- Enhancing the secrecy of the vote, possibly returning to folded ballot papers
- Enhancing the security of ballot boxes with the active involvement of candidates, parties and officials in recording seal numbers for later checking
Public information
Given the challenges presented, the report sees the execution of the Vote Scotland campaign as in the most part commendable. However, efforts to provide more detailed information were frustrated by the late decisions of Ministers on the design of the ballot papers. Had the research by Cragg Ross Dawson on the Scottish parliamentary ballot paper been taken into account, the campaign could have been strengthened.
The report raises concerns over the delay in sending out questionnaires to measure the quality of information received, of information for ‘hard to reach voters’ and over the changes to the Glasgow and Lothian ballots. The report does commend the Vote Scotland campaign for working with Returning Officers to place information officers in each polling station.
It proposes:
- Information Officers be used in future combined elections, or where changes are made to practice
- That the CRO develops selection criteria and training programmes for the role of Information Officer
- That the CRO takes responsibility for working with Returning Officers for Scotland-wide and polling station based information campaigns in future.
The count
Issues relating to the overnight count; The report found that unreasonable demands were placed upon key election officials as too many count-related activities were required directly after the close of the poll. There was also a conflict between the Electoral Commission and the Secretary of State for Scotland over when the count for local elections should start.
It proposes that:
- If the polls continue to close at 10pm, there should be no overnight count.
- A ‘fresh team’ could work overnight to receive ballot boxes and prepare for an immediate start the next morning.
Electronic counting
Numerous issues are identified as problems with electronic counting, including:
- Delays from the planning cycle combined to result in the election being partially driven by the technology rather than those responsible for the overall policy and management of elections;
- The legislative and policy frameworks that guide electronic counting are underdeveloped. As a result a number of decisions that should have been taken at the outset were not;
- Electronic counting technology involves some operational risk;
- There were problems with the scanning of ballot papers due, for example, to the need to fold the postal ballot papers and the design of the 24 candidate ballot paper;
- There were concerns that most stakeholders were uncertain how the process was being conducted leading to a lack of transparency;
- There were problems in verifying the information held to ensure that it was complete and correct.
However, the report notes that if the STV system is here to stay, the electronic count cannot be reasonably abandoned, despite some localised problems. No evidence was found that the electronic count contributed to the number of rejected ballot papers.
It recommends:
- An electronic count continues to be used in elections using STV.
- Electronic counting not used in the 2011 elections, until the problems from 2007 are resolved
- The proposed review of legislation ensures that electronic counting is integrated into the electoral process, and be carried out by the CRO
- That to restore confidence all doubtful papers be adjudicated by Returning Officer staff based upon a guidance booklet developed by the CRO, with no Auto adjudication
- Each rejected ballot paper be given its own code in order to:
- facilitate greater consistency of adjudication across Scotland;
- provide a clear rationale for every rejected ballot paper, which could be observed and
- challenged if necessary by party agents;
- reduce the workload on Returning Officers and their deputes, as trained adjudication
