Watchdog aims to change code on postal votes Tuesday 30 September 2014 The independent elections watchdog is looking to change a code of conduct for political campaigners to stop them handling any completed postal votes. It comes as it emerged police, in dialogue with the Crown Office, are continuing to assess allegations that pro-Union campaigners committed a criminal breach of electoral secrecy law by examining Scottish independence referendum postal ballot papers to gauge how well the Better Together campaign was doing before the polls had closed. The Electoral Commission has circulated a consultation since September 19, the day after the referendum, revealing proposed code changes that make clear campaigners should not handle any completed electoral registration, absent vote application forms or postal ballot packs. While the proposals were not borne out of the referendum experience, sources say they expect any lessons to be learned from the poll to feed into the consultation. Elections guidance on postal votes states it is already an offence for anyone attending the opening of postal votes to attempt to ascertain how any vote has been cast or to communicate any such information obtained. Failure to observe the secrecy requirement is a criminal offence punishable by law and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months and/or to a fine of up to £5,000. Complaints about the referendum were passed to police by the public and the Commission after comments by Scottish Conservatives leader Ruth Davidson and a prominent support of the Better Together campaign. Ms Davidson said on television 45 minutes after the ballots closed that they had been incredibly encouraged by the results of a sample opening of the postal ballot, which, she said, had taken place around the country over the few weeks before the poll closed. She said agents were able to take tallies of postal ballots and the reports have been very positive for us. The Commissions revised code of conduct, which focuses on behaviour in the lead-up to polling day, applies to candidates, their agents, staff and supporters and political party officers. The revised code would tell campaigners they should never touch or handle anyone elses ballot paper. Campaigners are already told they should never observe voters completing their ballot paper as it should be completed in secret. The Commission said the revised code was embarked upon as its reviews revealed concerns from members of the public and electoral administrators about the impact of campaigners activities on vulnerable voters and on perceptions of the integrity of the absent voting process. It found some voters felt pressured by campaigners to apply to vote by post and some expressed concerns over their role in handling postal vote applications and ballot packs while giving assistance to vote. The Commission said: We concluded it is not appropriate for campaigners to be directly involved in the voting process, including handling completed absent vote applications and postal ballot packs. We want to ensure campaigners are able to fulfil their vital role during elections. However, we are also clear that leaving unreformed the current involvement of campaigners in the voting process itself is not a satisfactory option. The consultation document added: Electoral fraud has the potential to affect the results of elections and undermine trust in the democratic process. Although there is no evidence to suggest there have been widespread, systematic attempts to undermine the electoral system in the UK, there is a consistent underlying level of concern among voters about electoral fraud in the UK. comments iain Lawson, Paisley It was not just Ms Davidson, Labours John McTernan also made comments about knowing the postal vote situation way in advance of even Ms Davidson. The entire postal vote situation is wide open to abuse and badly needs reformed and curtailed. Neil Homer, Polmont Fail to see the need for anyone from any party to have access to any of the postal votes, sample or not, thats ridiculous. John Jamieson Neil Homer, Polmont There must always be access to any opening of any kind of vote to ensure that fraud is not taking place. Frank Galvin, Edinburgh John Jamieson Yes; but not by the politicians; because in this case, the fraud was caused by them having access to the votes. In fact, it wasnt just that they had access by witnessing the opening of ballot boxes..... they saw the results and then disclosed them. What were the officials present doing? They know that the postal votes were supposed to be kept face down. How come they, I guess, stood and watched whilst the law was being broken by Better Together? Andrew R M Craik, east kilbrid Any thing that tightens up the procedure would be a welcome change but it always needs to be looked at. Every system, voting, betting can be beaten the fact that Ruthie and McTernan beat the postal votes system shows just how simple that system was., I mean to say neither are Nobel Laureates. Tom Flinn, Dunbar Postal ballot should not be opened until all ballots are in and the official count begins. In Edinburgh there was a strong rumour some days before the count saying that postal ballots had supported the yes side. Such things should be impossible. I fail to see why anyone should see my vote before the count should I have voted postally.
Posted on: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 06:41:18 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015