David Mundell MP Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Chairman of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party 83 Princes Street Edinburgh EH2 2ER

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

David Mundell MP Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Chairman of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party 83 Princes Street Edinburgh EH2 2ER David Mundell MP Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Chairman of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party 83 Princes Street Edinburgh EH2 2ER 31st July 2007 Mr Ron Gould Scottish Elections Review 93 George Street Edinburgh EH2 3ES Dear Ron Please find attached the Scottish Conservative Party’s submission to the Scottish Elections Review. I trust that the points we make in respect to the various aspects of the review will be given due consideration. I welcome your appointment to lead the Scottish Elections Review and hope that with your guidance and expertise, together with colleagues, we will be able to establish why there was such a high incidence of rejected ballots and why so many voters were disenfranchised from voting in the recent Scottish Elections held in May 2007. I look forward to your report and considering any recommendations you may make to ensure that we restore public trust and integrity within our electoral system in Scotland and throughout the United Kingdom. Yours sincerely David Mundell MP SUBMISSION TO SCOTTISH ELECTIONS REVIEW The Scottish Conservative Party welcomes the opportunity to comment on the current Electoral Commission Statutory Review of the conduct of the Scottish elections held in May 2007 and recognises the appointment of Ron Gould as an independent chairman of this review. However, we still remain concerned that a full and complete inquiry should be undertaken which is independent of all stakeholders, including the Electoral Commission which was involved in the setting out of recommendations for the design of the single ballot paper used for the Scottish Parliamentary election, commissioned Cragg Ross Dawson to undertake research on the final design of the ballot paper, and is responsible for increasing participation in elections. The introduction of so many changes on the same day significantly contributed to voter confusion and a record high level of rejected ballots. The review must give serious consideration to the impact of this decision to better inform future changes to the electoral process and to reassure the public of the integrity of the electoral system. Given the structure of the review, we would like to provide comment on the following key areas: 1) LEGISLATION: We are sympathetic to the view that existing legislation relevant to elections does not adequately deal with the introduction of new voting systems, the proliferation of political parties, and technological advancements which have changed, and will continue to change, the operation of elections. We believe that proper consideration should be given to reviewing current legislation to ensure it is fit for purpose. 2) COMBINED ELECTIONS: Holding both elections on the same day had a significant impact on the number of rejected ballots and contributed to voter confusion. Scottish Conservatives have led the debate on decoupling the elections and have sought to bring about this separation on several occasions through the tabling of Members Bills in the Scottish Parliament (firstly by David Mundell and then by David Davidson when David Mundell was elected to the House of Commons). As part of the consultation process for that Bill, there was considerable external support: • 60% of respondents supported decoupling • The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities as well as 11 out of 17 local authorities who responded • The Association of Electoral Administrators and the Society of Local Authority Lawyers and Administrators in Scotland The Arbuthnott Commission also recommended that the Scottish parliamentary and local council elections should be decoupled on the basis that: “(it would) reduce the complexity of voting, potentially reduce voter confusion and help keep the number of invalid votes to a minimum. It would also reduce administrative complexity in the planning, management and counting of elections, and enhance the transparency of the electoral process, especially allowing attention to be focussed on local issues.”1 David Mundell highlighted the possibility of more rejected ballot papers when two different voting systems were introduced on the same day in a Westminster Hall debate on the Arbuthnott Commission report: “The point about ranking candidates on the same day is that on one ballot people are asked to place an X and on the other they are asked to write 1, 2, and 3. We have clear evidence from elections in Northern Ireland – I had the opportunity to see the count in the last Assembly elections – of large numbers of people who understand that they have more than one vote but who, despite 20-odd years of operating that system, put two Xs on the ballot paper, making it invalid. Even if we accept the argument for STV, which I do not, what can be the purpose of holding such an election on the same day if – as was again shown in the London mayoral elections – having two separate systems exposes us to the risk of a disproportionately large number of people spoiling their ballots?” Local and Scottish Parliament elections should not be held on the same day because we need to ensure that there is an opportunity to have a proper debate on local issues and services delivered by councils as part of a general trend towards greater autonomy at a local level. Annabel Goldie MSP, Leader of the Scottish Conservatives, has committed the party to introducing another Member’s Bill to address this issue. 3) BALLOT DESIGN: While Scottish Conservatives did not protest about the use of a single ballot paper for the Scottish Parliamentary elections, we are concerned about decisions made to remove instructional information from the ballot papers distributed in the Glasgow and Lothian regions, which recorded the highest number of rejected ballot papers. It is a tenet of our democracy that people will be afforded the same opportunity to vote in an election whether they are living in Aberdeen or Edinburgh. It is very clear that this did not happen, moreover the sample ballot papers presented to political parties and the public were not the same as the final ballot papers used and distributed in these two regions. The Review must establish the following: • When the decision was made to alter these ballot papers in these two regions? • Who took the decision to alter these ballot papers, and who signed off the decision? • As the person ultimately responsible for the Scottish parliamentary elections, the role of the Secretary of State needs to be explained. 1 Putting Citizens First: Boundaries, Voting and Representation in Scotland, Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems, 2006, page 50 • What was the basis of this decision, and as many have suggested, was it anything to do with technical considerations of electronically counting votes which required a limited number of candidates to appear on the ballot papers? Scottish Conservatives also express concern about the phrasing on the other regional ballot papers, telling voters they had two votes, but not clearly specifying one in each column. Scottish Conservatives are also unsatisfied with the lack of extensive research undertaken to address voter understanding of the ballot paper design. We believe that limited quantitative research to 100 people is grossly insufficient to guarantee an acceptable level of understanding, particularly for voters with sight difficulties, disabilities, language barriers, and those living in high levels of social deprivation as defined by the Strathclyde University Report published by Dr Christopher Carman and Professor James Mitchell (which has been submitted to this Review). The Scotland Office and the Electoral Commission should have been satisfied that these issues were adequately addressed by testing any proposed new ballot papers in a more robust and extensive way. 4) POSTAL BALLOTS: An increasing number of voters are opting to apply for a postal ballot in the belief that their democratic right to vote will still be honoured even though, for whatever personal reason, they are unable to visit a polling station on Election Day. It may never be possible to determine decisively the exact number of postal ballot papers not submitted due to the papers never arriving or arriving too late. It is clear that several issues contributed to the delay of delivering ballot papers to those voters who had requested them: • Local authorities centralised the printing and distribution of postal ballot papers, and the papers did not arrive in the mailing centre until too late • Some local authorities undertook to hand deliver, by use of taxis or whatever means, ballot papers to residential homes, however some chose not to offer this service • Requests by voters to courier/send ballot papers to holiday destinations were denied, even though these papers should have arrived prior to their departure Scottish Conservatives believe that more research is required into the turn around being achieved for postal ballot papers, believing that more resourcing is the answer to this problem rather than extending the period between declaration of candidates and the Election Day. One of the key aims of the Electoral Commission is to increase participation in elections, yet it single-handedly failed to deal with the complaints lodged in advance of the elections when it became patently clear that postal ballot papers were not going to arrive on time. At least four political parties, including the Scottish Conservatives, contacted the Electoral Commission, to seek verification of when these issues would be rectified and in every instance were advising people that it would be sorted out in time. This was clearly a commitment they could not have delivered on. 5) ELECTRONIC COUNTING: It is very clear given the difficulties faced at a number of counts and the subsequent confusion surrounding many decisions, that e-counting presented real challenges to returning officers, agents, candidates and political parties. A proper investigation is required to determine whether sufficient planning and testing of the machines was undertaken, if the above stakeholders are to ever have faith in the future use of e-counting and DRS as a provider.
Recommended publications
  • 1 Andrew Marr Show, Jeremy Hunt, Mp
    1 ANDREW MARR SHOW, JEREMY HUNT, MP ANDREW MARR SHOW, 30TH JUNE, 2019 JEREMY HUNT, MP Foreign Secretary AM: Now the truth of the matter is, you know, you’re making a bit of progress but you’re still far, far behind Boris Johnson, and that’s partly down to your own use of language. Do you regret calling him a coward? JH: Well what I said is, “don’t be a coward,” because I think it’s a great shame. This is actually the last of your shows before many Conservative Party members will vote, because they’ll be getting their ballot papers in the next few days and he hasn’t been on here, he hasn’t been prepared to do head to head debates with me before people vote and I think people want a contest; I think that’s respectful to members and I think it will be much better for whoever’s Prime Minister to have that had contest first. So I think what we need is a bit of mojo from Bo-Jo. AM: Now you have also said he must be straight with people. Being straight is our motto here today. JH: I’m always straight on your show, Andrew. AM: Of course you are. In that spirit I want to ask about the Hunt spending splurge, because it seems like an awful lot of money. Corporation Tax, your proposals on Corporation Tax would cost about £13 billion, where would that come from? JH: Well we have about £26 billion of headroom at the moment, and this is a very – AM: I thought you’d say that.
    [Show full text]
  • Msps with Dual Mandates
    MSPs with Dual Mandates Session 5 (5 May 2016 to date) MSPs in Session 5 who were also MPs Name of MSP Party MSP for MP for Additional Notes Douglas Ross Con Highlands and Islands Moray Elected in the general election on 8 June 2017. Resigned as an MSP 11 June 2017. Ross Thomson Con North East Scotland Aberdeen South Elected in the general election on 8 June 2017. Resigned as an MSP 12 June 2017. MSPs in Session 5 who are also Councillors Name of MSP Party MSP for Councillor for Additional Notes Tom Mason Con North East Scotland Midstocket/ Rosemount Appointed as MSP for North East Scotland on 15 June 2017. He replaced Ross Thomson who resigned on 12 June 2017. MSPs in Session 5 who were also Councillors Name of MSP Party MSP for Councillor for Additional Notes Jeremy Balfour Con Lothian Corstorphine/Murrayfield Resigned as a Councillor 4 May 2017. Michelle Ballantyne Con South Scotland Selkirkshire Resigned as a Councillor 30 November 2017. She became the regional member for the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party for South Scotland on 17 May 2017. She replaced Rachael Hamilton who resigned on 2 May 2017. Finlay Carson Con Galloway and West Dumfries Castle Douglas and Glenrothes Resigned as a Councillor 4 May 2017. Maurice Cory Con West Scotland Lomond North Resigned as a Councillor 4 May 2017. Page 1 of 8 MSPs with Dual Mandates Mairi Gougeon SNP Angus North and Mearns Brechin and Edzell Elected as Mairi Evans. Resigned as a Councillor 4 May 2017. Monica Lennon Lab Central Scotland Hamilton North and East Resigned as a Councillor 4 May 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservative Manifesto
    THE SCOTTISH CONSERVATIVE AND UNIONIST PARTY MANIFESTO 2016 THE SCOTTISH CONSERVATIVE AND UNIONIST PARTY MANIFESTO 2016 CHAPTER HEADING A STRONG OPPOSITION - A STRONGER SCOTLAND A STRONG OPPOSITION. A STRONGER SCOTLAND 1 THE SCOTTISH CONSERVATIVE AND UNIONIST PARTY MANIFESTO 2016 Contents RUTH DAVIDSON FOR A STRONG OPPOSITION Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 NO TO A SECOND REFERENDUM The facts ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Why it matters .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Our commitment ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 HOLDING THE SNP TO ACCOUNT Our programme for
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Ministerial Committee Communiqué
    JOINT MINISTERIAL COMMITTEE COMMUNIQUÉ ! ! A Plenary meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee was held today in 10 Downing Street under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister, Rt Hon Theresa May MP.! ! The participants were:! ● from HM Government the Prime Minister, Rt Hon Theresa May, MP, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, Rt Hon David Davis MP, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Rt Hon Greg Clark MP, the Secretary of State for Scotland, Rt Hon David Mundell MP, the Secretary of State for Wales, Rt Hon Alun Cairns MP Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Rt Hon James Brokenshire, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Rt Hon David Gauke MP and the Minister for the Cabinet Office, Rt Hon Ben Gummer MP;! ● from the Scottish Government the First Minister, Rt Hon Nicola Sturgeon MSP and the Minister for UK Negotiations on Scotland's Place in Europe, Michael Russell MSP;! ● from the Northern Ireland Executive the First Minister, Rt Hon Arlene Foster MLA and the deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness MLA; ! ● from the Welsh Government the First Minister, Rt Hon Carwyn Jones AM and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford AM. ! ! The three principal agenda items at the meeting were the state of relations between the administrations, exiting the European Union and economic growth and industrial strategy. ! ! On the first item, Ministers discussed the principles which should govern relations between the four administrations and noted work in hand on a number of procedural and administrative measures intended to make the JMC a more effective forum for the discussion and management of inter-administration issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Inquiry Into Boundaries, Voting & Representation in Scotland
    -2 NORTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM No. -..-- L...... REPORT To: POLICY AND RESOURCES Subject: INQUIRY INTO BOUNDARIES, COMMITTEE VOTING AND REPRESENTATION IN SCOTLAND -CONSULTATION - THE ARBUTHNOTT COMMISSION From: DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION Date: 18 August 2005 Ref: JOHIJAFIIL 1. Purpose of Report 1.I The Policy and Resources Committee at its meeting on 8 February 2005 considered a report (1) outlining the remit of the Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems (the Arbuthnott Commission) set up by the Secretary of State for Scotland in July 2004; (2) ’ advising of a consultation received from the Commission inviting comments by 15 April 2005 on various matters in relation to boundaries and voting systems and (3) proposing that the MemberlOfficer Group on Local Governance prepare a detailed response for submission to the next meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee. 1.2 As a result, consideration was given to the consultation paper at the meeting of the MernbedOfficer Group held on 7 April 2005, at which time the Working Group formulated responses to the questions posed in the Commission’s consultation, those responses being as attached in Appendix 1 to this report. 1.3 The responses prepared by way of the Working Group were endorsed at the Policy and Resources Committee meeting on 19 April 2005. 2. Request for Meeting 2.1 In addition, the Policy and Resources Committee agreed in April that the MembedOfficer Working Group on Local Governance, representing the Council, should seek a meeting with representatives of the Arbuthnott Commission. 2.2 A response has now been received from the Commission dated 30 June 2005 and a copy is attached as Appendix 2 to this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Spice Briefing
    MSPs BY CONSTITUENCY AND REGION Scottish SESSION 1 Parliament This Fact Sheet provides a list of all Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) who served during the first parliamentary session, Fact sheet 12 May 1999-31 March 2003, arranged alphabetically by the constituency or region that they represented. Each person in Scotland is represented by 8 MSPs – 1 constituency MSPs: Historical MSP and 7 regional MSPs. A region is a larger area which covers a Series number of constituencies. 30 March 2007 This Fact Sheet is divided into 2 parts. The first section, ‘MSPs by constituency’, lists the Scottish Parliament constituencies in alphabetical order with the MSP’s name, the party the MSP was elected to represent and the corresponding region. The second section, ‘MSPs by region’, lists the 8 political regions of Scotland in alphabetical order. It includes the name and party of the MSPs elected to represent each region. Abbreviations used: Con Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Green Scottish Green Party Lab Scottish Labour LD Scottish Liberal Democrats SNP Scottish National Party SSP Scottish Socialist Party 1 MSPs BY CONSTITUENCY: SESSION 1 Constituency MSP Region Aberdeen Central Lewis Macdonald (Lab) North East Scotland Aberdeen North Elaine Thomson (Lab) North East Scotland Aberdeen South Nicol Stephen (LD) North East Scotland Airdrie and Shotts Karen Whitefield (Lab) Central Scotland Angus Andrew Welsh (SNP) North East Scotland Argyll and Bute George Lyon (LD) Highlands & Islands Ayr John Scott (Con)1 South of Scotland Ayr Ian
    [Show full text]
  • Uk Government and Special Advisers
    UK GOVERNMENT AND SPECIAL ADVISERS April 2019 Housing Special Advisers Parliamentary Under Parliamentary Under Parliamentary Under Parliamentary Under INTERNATIONAL 10 DOWNING Toby Lloyd Samuel Coates Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Deputy Chief Whip STREET DEVELOPMENT Foreign Affairs/Global Salma Shah Rt Hon Tobias Ellwood MP Kwasi Kwarteng MP Jackie Doyle-Price MP Jake Berry MP Christopher Pincher MP Prime Minister Britain James Hedgeland Parliamentary Under Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Chief Whip (Lords) Rt Hon Theresa May MP Ed de Minckwitz Olivia Robey Secretary of State INTERNATIONAL Parliamentary Under Secretary of State and Minister for Women Stuart Andrew MP TRADE Secretary of State Heather Wheeler MP and Equalities Rt Hon Lord Taylor Chief of Staff Government Relations Minister of State Baroness Blackwood Rt Hon Penny of Holbeach CBE for Immigration Secretary of State and Parliamentary Under Mordaunt MP Gavin Barwell Special Adviser JUSTICE Deputy Chief Whip (Lords) (Attends Cabinet) President of the Board Secretary of State Deputy Chief of Staff Olivia Oates WORK AND Earl of Courtown Rt Hon Caroline Nokes MP of Trade Rishi Sunak MP Special Advisers Legislative Affairs Secretary of State PENSIONS JoJo Penn Rt Hon Dr Liam Fox MP Parliamentary Under Laura Round Joe Moor and Lord Chancellor SCOTLAND OFFICE Communications Special Adviser Rt Hon David Gauke MP Secretary of State Secretary of State Lynn Davidson Business Liason Special Advisers Rt Hon Amber Rudd MP Lord Bourne of
    [Show full text]
  • Invitation to Join the Government of Britain
    INVITATION TO JOIN THE GOVERNMENT OF BRITAIN THE CONSERVATIVE MANIFESTO FOR ScOTLAND 2010 INVITATION TO JOIN THE GOVERNMENT OF BRITAIN A country is at its best when the bonds between people are strong and when the sense of national purpose is clear. Today the challenges facing Britain are immense. Our economy is overwhelmed by debt, our social fabric is frayed and our political system has betrayed the people. But these problems can be overcome if we pull together and work together. If we remember that we are all in this together. Some politicians say: ‘give us your vote and we will sort out all your problems’. We say: real change comes not from government alone. Real change comes when the people are inspired and mobilised, when millions of us are fired up to play a part in the nation’s future. Yes this is ambitious. Yes it is optimistic. But in the end all the Acts of Parliament, all the new measures, all the new policy initiatives, are just politicians’ words without you and your involvement. How will we deal with the debt crisis unless we understand that we are all in this together? How will we raise responsible children unless every adult plays their part? How will we revitalise communities unless people stop asking ‘who will fix this?’ and start asking ‘what can I do?’ Britain will change for the better when we all elect to take part, to take responsibility – if we all come together. Collective strength will overpower our problems. Only together can we can get rid of this government and, eventually, its debt.
    [Show full text]
  • (2017) Women Leaders in the Political Field in Scotland: a Socio-Historical Approach to the Emergence of Leaders
    Robinson, S. and Kerr, R. (2017) Women leaders in the political field in Scotland: a socio-historical approach to the emergence of leaders. Leadership, (doi:10.1177/1742715017710592) This is the author’s final accepted version. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/140039/ Deposited on: 27 October 2017 Enlighten – Research publications by members of the University of Glasgow http://eprints.gla.ac.uk Women leaders in the political field in Scotland: a socio-historical approach to the emergence of leaders Authors: Sarah Robinson University of Glasgow [email protected] Ron Kerr University of Edinburgh [email protected] Introduction This study responds to a call for papers for the International Studying Leadership Conference (Edinburgh 2015) to ‘rethink leadership research1. We address this call by providing an example of how a turn to historical methods can help leadership scholars ‘move away from ideas of individual agency and control, and take into account the power relations that shape the more emergent processes of organising and change’ (Harrison, 2016). This move might involve, we suggest, looking to the past to understand the present. We therefore present an approach to leadership studies that combines history, sociology and politics, in identifying ‘emergent processes of organisation and change’ (Harrison, 2016). In so doing, we also respond to calls to bring together sociological and historical approaches (Calhoun, 2013; Hobsbawm, 2016) in order to write a ’social history of the present’ (Bourdieu, 1995: 111).
    [Show full text]
  • Contents Theresa May - the Prime Minister
    Contents Theresa May - The Prime Minister .......................................................................................................... 5 Nancy Astor - The first female Member of Parliament to take her seat ................................................ 6 Anne Jenkin - Co-founder Women 2 Win ............................................................................................... 7 Margaret Thatcher – Britain’s first woman Prime Minister .................................................................... 8 Penny Mordaunt – First woman Minister of State for the Armed Forces at the Ministry of Defence ... 9 Lucy Baldwin - Midwifery and safer birth campaigner ......................................................................... 10 Hazel Byford – Conservative Women’s Organisation Chairman 1990 - 1993....................................... 11 Emmeline Pankhurst – Leader of the British Suffragette Movement .................................................. 12 Andrea Leadsom – Leader of House of Commons ................................................................................ 13 Florence Horsbrugh - First woman to move the Address in reply to the King's Speech ...................... 14 Helen Whately – Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party ............................................................. 15 Gillian Shephard – Chairman of the Association of Conservative Peers ............................................... 16 Dorothy Brant – Suffragette who brought women into Conservative Associations ...........................
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Communique Joint Ministerial Committee
    OFFICIAL JOINT COMMUNIQUE JOINT MINISTERIAL COMMITTEE (PLENARY) 19 DECEMBER 2018 NO. 10 DOWNING STREET A plenary meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee was held today in Downing Street, chaired by the Prime Minister, Rt Hon Theresa May MP. The participants were: ● from HM Government the Prime Minister, Rt Hon Theresa May, MP, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Rt Hon David Lidington MP, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, Rt Hon Stephen Barclay MP, the Secretary of State for Scotland, Rt Hon David Mundell MP, the Secretary of State for Wales, Rt Hon Alun Cairns MP, and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Rt Hon Karen Bradley MP; ● from the Scottish Government the First Minister, Rt Hon Nicola Sturgeon MSP and the Cabinet Secretary for Government Business and Constitutional Relations, Michael Russell MSP; and ● from the Welsh Government the First Minister, Mark Drakeford AM and Jeremy Miles AM, Counsel General Designate and Brexit Minister. David Sterling, Head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service attended the meeting in the continued absence of a Northern Ireland Executive. The Prime Minister congratulated the First Minister of Wales on his appointment. The two principal agenda items at the meeting were exiting the European Union and the state of relations. Under the first item, the Prime Minister updated the First Ministers on negotiations with the European Union. The Committee discussed next steps on the UK’s exit from the EU. Under the second item, the Committee noted progress on the review on intergovernmental relations and remitted further work to officials.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence Submission to the Independent Review Into the 2007
    Evidence submission to the Independent Review into the 2007 Scottish Elections from the Electoral Reform Society 1. Introduction The Electoral Reform Society welcomes this independent inquiry into the Scottish elections of 3 May 2007. We hope that the Inquiry will be able to throw light on: What went wrong in the conduct of these elections; What needs to be done to reduce the risk of the same problems arising in future elections; What other changes should be made to our electoral arrangements. Although in many ways the elections of 3 May were a step forwards for Scottish democracy, serious problems were nevertheless encountered. If with hindsight it is concluded that there were deficiencies in the planning and preparation for the elections, we hope the focus will be on the changes that need to be made before the next round of elections and not on the apportionment of blame. In our work in Scotland over the past year, we have not encountered a single person with responsibility for the elections not totally committed to making the elections a success and not entirely professional in their approach. The Society has already contributed materials to this Inquiry, including research notes on ballot rejection in: • Rejected ballots in UK General Elections • Rejected ballots in Welsh and Scottish elections • Rejected ballots in London elections. We draw on these in this submission, and attach copies of the research notes for ease of reference. We would be delighted to provide further copies of any other Society publications on request: many are available in both electronic format and as hard copies.
    [Show full text]