Voter registration reforms could see 10m fall off electoral roll, MPs warn

Cross-party committee says democratic institutions could be put at risk by proposals to relax rules

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/no...P=FBCNETTXT9038

 

Britain faces a "real risk" that its democratic institutions will be damaged by government plans to relax the registration of voters, a cross-party committee of MPs has warned.

 

Amid claims that up to 10 million voters could fall off the electoral roll, mainly from disadvantaged groups, the committee says new parliamentary boundaries might be drawn up on an unfair basis as a result.

 

The concerns are raised in a report published on Friday by the political and constitutional reform select committee, which examines government plans to introduce individual, instead of household, electoral registration.

 

The committee raises particular concerns about a government proposal to end the requirement to co-operate with electoral registration officers.

 

The Electoral Commission told the committee that 10% of voters could fall off the register. John Stewart, chairman of the electoral registration officers, warned that this was likely to be closer to 30% in inner-city areas. Labour fears this could lead to a smaller number of inner-city seats, where the party is strong, because the Boundary Commission is obliged in this parliament to equalise the size of constituencies.

 

As many as three million people already fail to register to vote under the current system, even when it is compulsory.

 

The report echoes some of Labour's fears. It says: "Under the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011, the boundary commissions are required to use the number of names on electoral registers as a basis for drawing constituency boundaries, with a narrow margin for manoeuvre. If levels of completeness come to vary significantly between different parts of the country, constituency boundaries will be redrawn on a basis that may be perceived as unfairly disadvantaging one party."

Graham Allen, Labour chairman of the committee, said: "Getting individuals to take responsibility for their own votes is the right thing to do, but it needs to be done in the right way. There are real risks in moving to a new system, not least that people with the right to vote could fall off the electoral roll in large numbers.

 

"This would be damaging to democracy, to public engagement in politics, and to the fairness of the basis on which MPs are elected. The transition to individual registration will only be a true success if the electoral rolls become not only more accurate but also more complete. The amendments which we propose - especially on the 2014 canvass and on not opting out - are essential if individual electoral registration (IER) is to command public confidence and not to be seen as unfair and politically partisan."

 

Peter Wardle, chief executive of the Electoral Commission, said: "We're glad to see they have recognised the strength of our concerns about the proposed registration opt-out. We want the government to give this cross-party report serious consideration and make improvements to the legislation before it is introduced to parliament."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I don't really like the idea of compulsion, but perhaps in the area of voting, our Antipodean friends have actually got this one right when they legally sanction people who dont vote...? I dunno, it's a tricky one, but somethinig like that certainly makes manipulating the whole representative democracy system a lot less likely to happen in Australia.... I mean, I could be wrong, but wasn't this the whole problem with the November 2000 election in Florida, that people who would have been likely to vote for Al Gore had "mysteriously" vanished off the voting register...?

 

Far be it from me to cry "conspiracy" here, but this along with the boundary changes really leads me to suspect that the Tories are hell-bent on manipulating our entire system of elective democracy to suit themselves. That is not only morally reprehensible, it's also downright criminal... Shame we cant impeach David Sca-Moron....

 

This is an incredibly difficult one, in that though it IS undoubtedly being done as it's low-hanging fruit with regards to quickly demolishing a Labour vote, it isn't technically outright gerrymandering. It makes arguing against it very difficult as it's a move which places the compulsion entirely on the voter - and then frames the debate entirely through the old Victorian standards and raises the whole 'well they've only got themselves to blame if they don't register to vote' argument - overprincipled huffing obviously which takes no account of how these things end up in practice, but it makes it very very difficult to oppose effectively.

 

I hope we do find someone who can effectively do so as my experience of it being raised as an issue amongst independents is that anyone who calls it gerrymandering comes off badly...

This is an incredibly difficult one, in that though it IS undoubtedly being done as it's low-hanging fruit with regards to quickly demolishing a Labour vote, it isn't technically outright gerrymandering. It makes arguing against it very difficult as it's a move which places the compulsion entirely on the voter - and then frames the debate entirely through the old Victorian standards and raises the whole 'well they've only got themselves to blame if they don't register to vote' argument - overprincipled huffing obviously which takes no account of how these things end up in practice, but it makes it very very difficult to oppose effectively.

 

I hope we do find someone who can effectively do so as my experience of it being raised as an issue amongst independents is that anyone who calls it gerrymandering comes off badly...

 

When you put it together with the proposed electoral boundary changes though, I think you probably can call it gerrymandering... It's certainly dodgy as hell even on its own. And I think it comes from an arrogant Tory presumption that they and their class are the ones who are "born to rule"... the Tories have NEVER liked the thought of the "proles" having a vote, they resisted it for hundreds of years and were really forced to accept the working classes and women voting.... They can re-brand themselves as "Conservative" or even call themselves "Bob" to appear innocuous, those of us who know history, know where the sympathies of the Tories ultimately lie.... And that has never changed...

I've written to my (Tory) MP about this and sent in a submission to the consultation.

 

The issue which my MP was most concerned about was jury service. At the moment the reason why registration is mandatory is because the register is also used for selecting people for jury service. An end to mandatory registration will allow people to opt out of jury service.

 

On the other issues, I framed it in a non-partisan way. Until now, constituency boundary reviews have used census data, i.e. the overall population. This government changed it to using the number of registered voters. With mandatory registration that can be justified on the grounds that the information is more up to date. However, if mandatory registration is ended, that changes. An MP has to serve all their constituents, not just those registered to vote. Therefore, some MPs could end up with substantially more constituents than others.

 

The register is also used by politicians to communicate with voters. That will be more difficult with an incomplete register. There will be more people complaining that they never hear anything from their MP / councillors. Telling them "It's your fault for not registering" is unlikely to go down well.

 

It also opens up the process to potential manipulation. A lot of people only vote in general elections. So, let's take a county like Surrey which currently has a full slate of Tory MPs. There is the potential for a substantial number of Labour and Lib Dem supporters deciding not to include themselves on the register used for drawing up new boundaries. If enough people do that, Surrey could lose a constituency. Those people can then re-register for the year when the election is due so they still get their vote. It could even be done in a more co-ordinated manner to try and manipulate the boundaries.

 

It should be noted that, a few weeks ago, it was being reported that the government were likely to retain compulsory registration because of the number of people raising concerns in the consultation exercise.