Purity of Elections in the UK
From Democracywiki
Central Lobby
The Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust commissioned a report entitled Purity of Elections in the UK: Causes for Concern which examined current UK electoral procedures.
 Our View Unlock Democracy has welcomed the launch of a new Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust report “Purity of Elections in the UK” by Stuart Wilks-Heeg, which exposes the degree to which the current electoral system is vulnerable to fraud. The campaign organisation has repeated its call for the government to introduce increased security measures to restore public trust in the system. Commenting, Director of Unlock Democracy Peter Facey said: “The government ran out of excuses for not introducing a system of individual voter registration at the very least several years ago. Its concerns that such a system would lead to fewer people being registered are misplaced. The current system of household registration is not only insecure but masks the true level of political disengagement in the UK. “The report makes the very important point that increased security needn’t be highly technical or expensive. Requiring voters to provide identification at the polling station as is the practice in Northern Ireland would be quick and simple to introduce as most people could simply use identification they already possess such as their driver’s license or passport. It is unacceptable for the government to insist that such measures must be introduced in one part of the United Kingdom but not in the rest. “There has been a record number of convictions for electoral fraud in recent years and we are likely to see more as a result of the 2008 elections. The government can no longer afford to be complacent about this and must introduce legislation at the earliest opportunity.” |
Contents |
Key Findings
- Concern that measures had been introduced (postal voting on demand for example) as a ‘quick fix’ to declining turnout but at the cost of electoral integrity.
- Serious concerns about how well UK election procedures measure up to international standards. The Gould report on the 2007 Scottish elections, suggested that voters had been treated as “an afterthought” and the Council of Europe monitoring report suggested that the British elections “are very vulnerable to fraud”.
- There have been at least 42 convictions for electoral fraud in the UK in the period 2000–2007. Whilst there hasn’t been a significant increase in electoral malpractice since the introduction of postal voting on demand the system is increasingly vulnerable to large-scale fraud. The Birmingham election court case in 2005 was illustrative of the threat.
- There is widespread, and justifiable, concern about both the comprehensiveness and the accuracy of the UK electoral registers – the poor state of the registers potentially compromises the integrity of the ballot. The use of household registration as opposed to individual led to the Council of Europe to condemn the UK as a “rather arcane system of voter registration”. Household registration not only takes away individual responsibility but also invests too much power in the hands of one person. It is more likely that data on the forms will be inaccurate when it is one person who is entrusted with filling it out.
- There is a genuine risk of electoral integrity being threatened by previously robust systems of electoral administration having reached ‘breaking point’ as a result of pressures imposed in recent years. The ‘general election that never was’, in Autumn 2007, highlighted the serious problems facing electoral administrators, because it is doubtful whether they would have been able to organize an election is a short period.
- Public confidence in the electoral process in the UK was the lowest in Western Europe in 1997, and has almost certainly declined further as a result of the extension of postal voting. Surveys conducted on behalf of the Electoral Commission show an increase in the proportion of electors regarding postal voting as being “very or fairly unsafe from fraud” from 34 per cent in 2004 to 46 per cent in 2005. More in-depth survey research for the 2004 all-postal pilots revealed that while 71 per cent of voters in non-pilot areas regarded postal voting as safe, only 51 per cent of voters in pilot areas felt this was the case.
- The benefits of postal and electronic voting have been exaggerated. E voting appears to be a costly exercise in providing choice to those who would otherwise have voted at the polling station or by post.
- There is evidence to suggest that money can have a powerful impact on the outcome of general elections, particularly where targeted at marginal constituencies over sustained periods of time. There is wide spread evidence to suggest that turnout is best promoted by political parties engaging with the electorate rather that simply making voting more convenient. This happens less when resources are targeted at the few ‘swing voters’.
- Outside of ministerial circles, there is a widespread support that a fundamental overhaul of UK electoral law, administration and policy is urgently required. The Electoral Commission has called for electoral pilots to cease and has begun a detailed review of the current UK system.
The Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002
The Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 sought to address the inaccuracies in the electoral register in Northern Ireland and to reduce the opportunities for malpractice. It was later supplemented by the Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2006.
The Act introduced many of the measures that both the Electoral Commission and this report believed would improve the integrity of UK elections. The Electoral Commission stated, “lessons from the experience in Northern Ireland (...) can be used to inform a realistic and robust plan for implementing individual registration in Great Britain”.
What the Act does
- Individual registration: individual electors, rather than heads of households, are required to complete the electoral registration forms.
- Personal identifiers: voter registration forms require electors to confirm their name and address and provide a signature and two personal identifiers (their date of birth and national insurance number). National insurance numbers are subsequently checked against records held by the Department for Work and Pensions.
- Rolling registration: in place of an annual canvass of electors.
- Photographic ID: all electors must produce one of four forms of valid, photographic identification when attending a polling station: a driving license, a passport, a senior-citizens bus pass, or an Electoral ID card. Electoral ID cards are available free on request to all registered voters.
The impact of these measures
- Improved accuracy of the register: Registration rates fell from the ‘unrealistic’ level of 96.6 per cent in 2001 to 81.7 percent in 2006, with subsequent registration campaigns restoring the level to 84.4 per cent by late 2007.
- Improved public confidence: In 2003, surveys showed that 70 per cent of those surveyed felt the registration system would reduce fraud and 74 per cent felt it would make voting more secure. Following the 2007 elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly, 80 per cent of those surveyed expressed satisfaction with the system of voter registration and 56 per cent agreed that they were serving to reduce the extent of electoral fraud .
- A marked decline in the disproportionately high number of tendered ballots issued in Northern Ireland, previously seen as potential evidence of widespread personation. At the 2005 General Election just 55 tendered ballots were issued in Northern Ireland compared to over 900 at the 1983 General Election.
The Impact of The Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 on Elections
Assembly Elections
a) In 2003, The Electoral Commission reported in response to the Assembly elections that in certain instances the introduction of the Electoral Fraud Act had negative implications.
- Individual registration has tended to marginalise certain groups (young people, students, those with learning disabilities, residents in poorer areas) into registering
- Less than half of those applicants wishing to register and were required to attend a special hearing showed up because they were put off by the hearings' "semi-judicial nature".
- Disadvantaged groups were less likely to have eligible identification. Just fewer than 3,500 people presented invalid or out-of-date identification.
- On the issue of rolling registration, the number of names on the May 2003 register increased by 2.1% from the December 2002 register although this was not uniform across Northern Ireland.
Nevertheless, the report concluded that the 2002 register was a more accurate reflection on those entitled to be registered. As of 1st August 2005, the Electoral Officer, through comparison of national insurance numbers, had satisfactorily confirmed the accuracy of 96% of entries on the register. Thus, whilst 122,000 fewer people voted from the previous 1998 Assembly poll the Commission believed that this was a result of the new voting requirements. There was a need to inform the public more clearly on the requirements.
b) In analysing the 2007 Assembly election The Electoral Commission reported that while perceptions of electoral fraud persist among the public, the reality does not match up at the time of the reports publication, no complaints or allegations concerning electoral fraud on polling day had been put to the Commission, or the police. In respect of postal voting the Chief Electoral Officer referred three cases of possible fraudulent postal votes to the police for investigation prior to polling day.
Westminster Parliament Elections 2005
a) Whilst there was an increase to 33,000 (up from the 2004 European election and the 2003 assembly election) of those wishing to vote by either postal and proxy Northern Ireland electoral authorities were confident that there was a low incidence of fraud related to the postal votes because the fraud laws enabled the authorities in Northern Ireland to scrutinise an applicant's signature and to check their date of birth and national insurance number against their database. Also, each application requires a third party witness’s signature.
Nevertheless, party members raised the following concern: -
- The SDLP reported cases where people had been given what they believed was a postal application form to a political party, but have then found the form switched to an application for a proxy vote, to be cast by another person.
Issues Concerning Registration Numbers In Northern Ireland
- Prior to the enactment of the Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002, the register contained 94.4% of the eligible voting age population. The first register under the new anti-fraud measures, published in December 2002, showed 85.1% of the eligible population, as registered.
- The Electoral Commission stated that the non-registration rate was largely explained by the fact that the carry forward system no longer applied and the removal of inflationary factors from the register.
- Whilst the numbers registered rose between annual canvass periods through rolling registration, the numbers registered immediately following the annual canvasses in autumn 2003 and autumn 2004 showed that numbers registered continued to drift downwards year on year. In 2003 it was 84.8% of voting population, in 2004 it was 83.1%.
- The Government in order to maximise the number registered before the 2005 General Election introduced two measures in Northern Ireland so that it would match the 91.1% rate for Great Britain. Whilst this had the desired affect of boosting rates, the Commission reported that it did compromise the registers accuracy.
1.Electoral Registration (Northern Ireland) Act 2005. This reinstated onto the register for one year only around 70,000 individuals who did not register during the 2004 annual canvass.
2. The Act also re-introduced the carry forward for the 2005 annual canvas. (The Government later introduced The Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2006 which replaced the annual canvass with a system of continuous registration).
- Northern Ireland was the only exception to the increase in postal voting. The take up of postal voting was three times higher than it was in 2001 for the rest of the UK. However, whilst every English region registered a modest turnout increase compared with 2001, with the exception of Northern Ireland, which dropped from 68% to 62.9%, this was still higher than in England, Scotland and Wales.
- The Electoral Commission reported that the number of people registered to vote at the 2007 Assembly elections had increased by approximately 18,000 since the 2003 elections.
- The move to continuous registration and the ability of the Chief Electoral Officer to request information from local and public authorities has the potential to increase the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the register.
- The proportion of people turning up with at least one form of correct photo ID increased from 2003. The Electoral Commissions research showed that 96% of those polled were aware of the requirement. Shaun Woodward, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland stated that counter-fraud measures had not adversely affected voting numbers.
