WORK PROGRAMME IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF THE ELECTORAL REGISTER AND INCREASING PUBLIC AWARENESS OF, AND PARTICIPATION IN, VOTER REGISTRATION.

Transcription

1 WORK PROGRAMME IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF THE ELECTORAL REGISTER AND INCREASING PUBLIC AWARENESS OF, AND PARTICIPATION IN, VOTER REGISTRATION. To: Electoral Registration Process Review Task & Finish Group 13 March 2013 By: Classification: Ward: Democratic Services and Scrutiny Manager Unrestricted All wards Summary: For Decision 1.0 Introduction and Background 1.1 On 22 February 2012, the Working Party agreed that in order to complete a thorough review, the Working Party focused its initial work on improving the level of voter registration across the District as a whole as a first stage of the project. 1.2 Work on the first stage was completed and the Working Party s findings reported to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel on 1 May An update on the conduct of the 2012 canvass and the recommendations relating to rolling registration, are elsewhere on the agenda for this meeting. 1.3 Due to the annual canvass and the Police and Crime Commissioner Elections it was agreed that the remainder of the work programme, the second stage, would be dealt with at the beginning of The second stage of the review would consider the following: a) To advise the Council s Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) on options for improving the accuracy of the electoral register. b) To advise the Council s ERO on options for increasing public awareness of, and participation in, voter registration. 2.0 Definition of a complete and accurate register 2.1 EROs have a duty to take necessary steps to maintain the electoral register. In order to maintain a complete and accurate electoral register, there is a need not only to ensure that every person who is entitled to be registered has an entry but also to remove entries from the register for those electors who are no longer eligible. 2.2 The Electoral Commission s (EC) interpretation of completeness and accuracy in relation to electoral registration, based on the legislative requirements for electoral registration in Great Britain, is as follows.

2 2.3 Completeness means: Every person who is entitled to have an entry in an electoral register is registered. No person who is not entitled to have an entry in an electoral register, including fictitious or dead persons, is registered. All relevant fields are completed in relation to every entry. 2.4 Accuracy means: None of the required information relating to any person registered is false or incorrect, intentionally or otherwise. 2.5 Essentially, completeness therefore means ensuring that only eligible people are included in the register of electors, while accuracy relates solely to the information that exists on the register without comment as to whether it should be on the register or not. 3.0 Sources of information for electoral registration 3.1 Inspection of other council records The ERO is authorised to inspect, for the purposes of their registration duties, records kept in whatever form by: a) the council which appointed them and any registrar of births and deaths b) any person, including a company or organisation, providing services to, or authorised to exercise any function of, any such authority as defined in (a) above Those persons, companies and organisations in (b) above include those that are providing outsourced services under any finance agreement The ERO is also entitled to make copies of any information contained within these records The ERO is required to make such use of these powers as is necessary in order to maintain the register. This duty applies throughout the year and is not confined to the canvass period In order to provide evidence that the ERO has fulfilled their duty to carry out the necessary steps under Section 9A of the RPA 1983, they should ensure that a record is kept of all council records inspected. Electoral Services currently inspect Council Tax records and Registrar s records in relation to deaths. It also liaises with the Housing Department on its House in multiple occupation (HMO) lists. 3.2 Use of third-party data Although the records that may be inspected were not compiled with electoral registration criteria in mind and may not provide all the information that an ERO requires, they can nevertheless provide useful partial or additional information to assist the ERO in their registration duties. It should be noted that while records may assist an ERO in identifying who does not have an entry in the register, any new entry made under the rolling registration process must always come from an application.

3 3.2.2 Information gathered from a third party should be treated with some caution as it may not be as reliable as information gathered directly from the householder or applicant. It is therefore recommended that information obtained from a third party be crosschecked where possible in order to validate it. If this is not possible, a record should be kept of the source of the information and the steps that were taken to obtain it. 4.0 Electoral Registration Officers entitlement to request information 4.1 If the ERO has any doubts about the eligibility of any applicant, they have the power to require any person to provide information relating to the eligibility of that applicant, namely regarding their age, nationality, residence and whether or not they are disqualified. Additionally, if the ERO has doubts about the age or nationality of any applicant, they may also require that person to provide evidence demonstrating that they meet either or both of these requirements. 4.2 The items which should be accepted by the ERO as evidence of a person s age or nationality include: a birth certificate or a statutory declaration stating the applicant s date of birth a certificate of naturalisation a document showing they have become a Commonwealth citizen a statutory declaration that they are a qualifying Commonwealth citizen, a citizen of the Republic of Ireland or a European Union citizen. 4.3 The cost of producing or copying documents should be reimbursed to the applicant by the ERO and such fees are a registration expense to be met by the local authority. 4.4 Electoral Registration Officers can require any person to give information required for the purposes of their duty to maintain the registers of Parliamentary and local government electors. This power enables Electoral Registration Officers to obtain information and it means that, for example, housing associations or private landlords can be required to give information. 4.5 In all cases, Electoral Registration Officers are advised to seek cooperation in the first instance, rather than using the threat of legal action; explaining the law may be sufficient to achieve the desired effect. 4.6 There may, however, be occasions when the ERO may wish to initiate legal action against someone who has been persistently uncooperative or obstructive. Any person who refuses to provide the information that is required to prepare the register is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale, currently set at 1,000. Any person who knowingly provides false information in connection with registration is liable on summary conviction to a fine of up to 5,000, imprisonment of up to six months, or both. It is important to remember that a person is not guilty of providing false information if they did not know, or had no reason to suspect, that the information was false. Electoral Services did not seek any further information on any applicant applying to register during the 2011/2012 period. Over the same period Electoral Services despatched 689 family claim forms to register. So far Electoral Services has sent 141 family claims for 2012/13 period.

4 5.0 Reviewing entitlement to be registered 5.1 Electoral Registration Officers should be proactive in the maintenance of their register and use all the datasets available to them to discover cases which may trigger a review of registration. The Data Protection Act 1998 does not prevent the ERO from viewing every record of the local authority as long as the data is used for registration purposes, which would include the processes around dealing with new applications, objections and reviews, and there are appropriate office procedures for ensuring the security of the data. 5.2 As part of their duties under Section 9A of the RPA 1983, Electoral Registration Officers should be constantly working to find and contact qualified residents who do not have an entry in the register. It is equally important that only those who are entitled to be registered have an entry in the register. 5.3 Previously, when a person became or remained an elector by completing a canvass form or otherwise by appearing on the annually revised register they would retain their registration until the next canvass period. That is no longer the case. Electors who have ceased to reside at the qualifying address no longer meet the residence test and are therefore no longer entitled to remain on the register. 5.4 Consequently, if an ERO discovers that an elector is not, or may not now be, resident at an address it would be part of their general duty to maintain the register to conduct a review. 5.5 The ERO should always attempt to discover the new address of the elector and this information should be passed to the new ERO if this is in a different area. Additionally, it is helpful if a registration application form is forwarded to the elector at their new address for completion and return to their new ERO. 5.6 The following situations do not require a review and the procedure for removal continues as before: The elector informs the ERO that they are no longer resident at their qualifying address. The ERO receives a notice from the elector s new ERO that the elector is no longer resident at the old qualifying address. The ERO receives notification of the death of an elector by the registrar of deaths, a relative or the executor. 6.0 Types of review 6.1 There are three options open to Electoral Registration Officers for conducting a review. The choice of which option to undertake is at the discretion of the ERO. Further consideration of each of these options can be found below. 6.2 Following the decision as to which type of review is to be carried out, a notice must be despatched to the elector, containing the relevant information as set out below. Please note that all periods mentioned below are calendar days, not working days.

5 6.3 Type A review Type A reviews occur when the ERO is of the opinion that the elector is not entitled to be registered. The ERO could reach such an opinion when other records, such as council tax or housing records, suggest that, for example, a resident has moved away from their qualifying address, and the ERO is confident as to the accuracy of those records inspected. A common example may be when an elector sends a letter, or completes a form produced by the ERO, stating that the elector in question is no longer resident at an address. If the ERO decides to undertake this form of review, Notice A must be sent to the elector. stating that the ERO believes that the person is not entitled to be registered and gives the reasons for that opinion. The elector should be told that they have 14 calendar days from the date of the notice to request a hearing, otherwise their name will be removed from the register Following the sending of Notice A, if the elector does not ask for a hearing within 14 days, the ERO must determine the review using any information that they have and any submitted by the elector or any other party. If the ERO considers that the elector should be removed, the entry will be removed at the next notice of alteration, subject to the determination deadline for the next register alteration. 6.4 Type B review Type B reviews enable the ERO to ask the elector for evidence on issues of age or nationality or to supply information on any other aspect in connection with the requirements for registration. The Commission envisages these reviews being conducted when an ERO has some doubts as to one or more of the eligibility criteria, but is not able to substantiate these by, for example, using other council records. If the ERO decides to undertake this form of review, Notice B must be sent to the elector Notice B gives reasons for the review and includes a requirement for evidence or further information. The elector should be told that they have 28 days from the date of the notice to supply the required information and that if they do not their registration may be removed. The ERO may also wish to remind the elector of the offence of giving false information to the ERO in their response. Following the sending of Notice B, if the elector has not submitted satisfactory evidence or information within 28 days, the ERO must send Notice A and should proceed with the rules for a Type A review. 6.5 Type C review Type C reviews occur when the ERO decides to go directly to a hearing. This may be in circumstances where the position of the elector and the ERO or any other person is clear and it would be more practicable to have a hearing to decide the matter than to gain further information and conduct a Type A or Type B review by post. A Type C review takes the shortest time and so may also be useful close to an election registration deadline If the ERO decides to undertake this form of review, Notice C must be sent to the elector. Notice C states the ERO s intention to hold a hearing. The notice must include the reasons for the review and the time and place of the hearing.

6 Electoral Services carried out 262 type A reviews for the 2011/2012 period. These reviews were instigated by communications received stating that an elector had moved away (e.g. via the return of a poll card, or postal ballot pack) and through information provided on household claim forms as part of the canvass (where the applicant has stated that all previous electors have moved out). So far Electoral Services has carried out 11 type A reviews for the 2012/13 period. Electoral Services has not carried out any Type B or C reviews to date. Furthermore, Electoral Services carried out the following monthly alterations for the 2011/2012 period: Changes 650 Deleted 1,062 (which incorporates deceased electors) Created 1,035 Total 2, Hearings 7.1 Application hearings Applications for registration do not have to be taken at face value. While a vast majority of applications will not need a hearing, the ERO has the option to take any application to a hearing. This process should be undertaken if there is a reason to doubt any application received based on any knowledge that the ERO may have. Additionally, if an application has been disallowed without a hearing, one may be demanded by the applicant. This demand must be made within three working days from the date of the decision and, due to the timescales, such notice should be accepted by written note, or fax, or orally. The ERO should ensure that once a decision is made to reject an application, the notice to be sent to the applicant is dated and sent by first class post on that same day A notice of hearing must be sent to the applicant stating the following: the time and place of the hearing the grounds for the hearing The date of the hearing must be set to take place no earlier than three working days and no later than seven working days after the date of the notice of the hearing. Electoral Services carried out no application hearings during the 2011/2012 period. So far Electoral Services has carried out no application hearings for the 2012/13 period Objection hearings Unless an objection is disallowed on one of the grounds discussed in Regulation 29(5), (5A) or (6), the ERO must hold a hearing to determine an objection. Additionally, if an objection has been disallowed without a hearing, one may be demanded by the objector. This demand must be made within three working days from the date of the decision and, due to the timescales, this notice should be accepted by written note, or fax, or orally. The ERO should ensure that once a

7 decision is made to reject an objection, the notice to be sent to the objector is dated and sent by first class post on that same day A notice of hearing must be sent to both the objector and the applicant or elector subject to an objection. The notice must state the following: the time and place of the hearing the name and address of the objector the grounds for the objection The objector s details will be made available to the applicant or elector. Some electors may not wish to make an objection due to their name being used in which case the ERO, if satisfied that an applicant or elector may not be qualified, could instead initiate a review of registration. Electoral Services carried out no objection hearings during the 2011/2012 period. 7.3 Arrangements The date of a hearing must be set to take place no earlier than three working days and no later than seven working days after the date of the notice of the hearing. The applicant, or, in the case of an objection, the objector and the applicant or elector subject to an objection, are entitled to attend the hearing, as is anyone who appears to the ERO to be interested. Any person entitled to appear may do so in person, or alternatively they may make a written representation or have someone else appear on their behalf. The ERO should ensure that as many relevant parties as possible have the opportunity to attend, in particular the applicant or, in the case of an objection, the objector and the applicant or elector subject to an objection EROs may require that evidence be given on oath, either because one of the people entitled to appear requests it, or because the ERO thinks it is desirable. While the ERO may administer the oath themselves, it is recommended that they seek advice from their legal team to ensure that the oath is in the correct form and that various religious and non-religious options are available If the applicant or, in the case of an objection, the objector; or the applicant or elector subject to an objection, fails to appear, the ERO may still continue to have the hearing and determine the application at the hearing. The ERO should also consider rearranging the hearing to an alternative time within the allowed period for the hearing if this is agreeable to the parties who had attended at the agreed time. Any written evidence, such as a letter or form, supplied by the applicant, elector or objector should be considered by the ERO in their absence Hearings are quasi-judicial proceedings and so it would be inappropriate to delegate this duty to an officer who is not appointed either as ERO or as a Deputy ERO. 7.4 Review hearings Unlike the hearing of an application or objection, which must not be held earlier than the third working day or later than the seventh working day after the issue of the notice of hearing, the regulations impose no upper time limit on the conduct of a review hearing. The sole timing requirement for review hearings is that at least three working days need to elapse from the issue of the notice of hearing before they can be held.

8 7.4.2 If the subject of a hearing fails to appear, the ERO may still determine that the subject of the review was not entitled or has ceased to be entitled to be registered. In making a determination, EROs must take into account written representations from the subject of the review and other interested parties. As with other hearings, the ERO should attempt to rearrange the hearing if possible within the period allowed. Electoral Services carried out no review hearings during the 2011/2012 period. 7.5 Appeals Where the ERO has made a determination at a hearing, whether arising from an application, an objection or a review, the applicant, objector or elector retains the right to appeal. They have 14 calendar days beginning from the date of the decision to issue a notice of appeal The notice of appeal must be submitted to the ERO and any other relevant party, together with the grounds of appeal. The ERO must then forward the notice to the county court or to the sheriff in Scotland, which should be accompanied by: a statement of the facts of the case the ERO s decision and their decision on any point specified as a ground of appeal Should the ERO consider that several appeals are based on similar grounds, they must give notice to the appropriate county court, or sheriff in Scotland In England and Wales, the Ministry of Justice has made arrangements so that anonymous registration appeals, which can only arise from reviews or the original application, should be heard in private. Electoral Services carried out no appeal hearings during the 2011/2012 period. 8.0 Additional initiatives 8.1 Registration confirmation letter Currently, the annual canvass is based on the qualification date of 15 th October. By the time the revised register is published the published information is already 6 weeks out of date. By the time of an election (normally during the first week in May) the published information is more than six months out of date Therefore at election times the register is more often than not inaccurate in part. It is only when poll cards for the forthcoming election are sent out that Electoral Services are informed of any changes to the published details, leaving little time to update the register before the pre-election qualifying date Therefore, some Local Authorities (LAs) send out registration confirmation letters detailing who is registered at an address with a family claim (registration) form printed on the reverse. Households are advised to check the information and make any amendments or additions on the family claim form These LAs would usually send these registration confirmation letters out around mid- March so that come election time the register is more accurate and fewer late changes need to be made Based on information supplied by our canvass form suppliers, a rough estimate of the costs involved in sending our registration confirmation letters are as follows:

9 Element Costs ( ) Postage* 15,000 Envelopes 1,500 Artwork and lasering 1,400 Setup 200 Enclosing 700 TOTAL 18,800 * Alternatively, canvassers could hand deliver these at a cost of roughly 12k (based on 2011 canvass) It should be noted that Democratic Services currently has no budget to send out registration confirmation letters. 8.2 Personal canvassing throughout the year on new properties EROs may think it appropriate to carry out personal canvassing in areas where new housing estates have been built, in a similar way to that undertaken during the annual canvass (e.g. new housing development at Westwood Cross) Again, Democratic Services currently has no budget to undertake this. 8.0 Public awareness 8.1 Statutory requirements Section 69 of the Electoral Administration Act 2006 introduced a duty for EROs to promote registration and electoral participation and states that they must have regard to any guidance from the Commission on this matter. 8.2 Planning a public awareness strategy Developing a public awareness strategy can help EROs to fulfil their legislative duty to promote registration and can help them to maximise their available time and resources As a starting point, EROs should consider their target audience. Local circumstances will, invariably, differ and activities necessary to raise awareness in one area may not be relevant, or may fail to work, in a different context Before developing a strategy, EROs need to be aware of what their starting point is. They may need to carry out a baseline audit to evaluate what processes are already in place in their area to raise awareness of registration.

10 8.3 Developing a strategy To help develop a strategy, the Commission recommends that Electoral Registration Officers carry out the following: Set up a public awareness working group. EROs could set up a working group with EROs from neighbouring areas and with key service providers or community groups. This group could help to develop and monitor their strategy. Carry out an information audit. Work with their appointing council to assess where people are likely to pick up information or fill out forms, for example when joining the library or paying bills. Build on existing work. Find out if any democratic engagement work is already being done by local youth and community service teams and see if this work can be incorporated into the strategy. Target under-registered groups. Identify which groups are underrepresented in terms of electoral registration in the area. Find local contact organisations. Contact local organisations or individuals that have access to, or influence with, the groups that have been identified, which could include voluntary sector groups, youth or social services workers, housing associations, sports clubs or faith groups. Set out when to target the groups. If resources are limited it may not be possible to target all these groups at once and so it is worthwhile making it explicit in the strategy which groups will be targeted and when. Identify key events. Focusing activity around key events, such as forthcoming elections and voter registration deadlines, Local Democracy Week, and freshers weeks, could be used to lift exposure of the work. Be realistic. It does not matter how many glossy leaflets, radio or television advertisements EROs have, the key to promoting public awareness at a local level is by building good partnerships across council departments and community groups The ERO should consider working with other EROs and with Returning Officers in the development of their public awareness strategy. Such joint working can help to deliver cost and efficiency savings and can also ensure a consistency of message across a wider area.

11 When developing a public awareness strategy, budget considerations will need to be taken into account. It is recommended that each ERO has a dedicated publicity budget, something Electoral Services doesn t currently have. The ERO has considerable discretion over the best use of publicity: this could perhaps take the form of billboards, posters, messages on outgoing post, or adverts in the press and other local media such as local commercial radio stations; or it may be appropriate to use promotional events such as road shows to increase voter awareness The EC has developed a number of leaflets (which are rarely used) and other resources which EROs can use as part of their public awareness strategy. The use of these materials can save EROs the costs associated with developing their own branding for publicity materials. 9.0 Evaluating public awareness work 9.1 The Electoral Commission suggests that it is vital that EROs evaluate their public awareness work. Evaluations are necessary for measuring the effectiveness of a project and demonstrating achievements. As such, they play an important role in showing that appropriate use is being made of taxpayers money. 9.2 An evaluation of public awareness work should help to collect the right information about the work undertaken, so that successes and lessons learnt are documented and recommendations can be made for the future. 9.3 The best time to plan and scope any evaluation is during the planning stage of the project. The advantage of making an evaluation plan at the start of a project is that it can sometimes identify ambiguities or inconsistencies in the proposed activity which can be corrected before it is launched. At the planning stage it is important to define the questions to be addressed by the evaluation and how these questions might be answered. 9.4 Any evaluation plan should clearly describe why the evaluation is taking place and what it intends to do. The evaluation should relate back clearly to the initial objectives of the project. 9.5 An evaluation plan should set out any limitations to the evaluation, including any potential risks to the reliability and validity of the evaluation design and the resulting findings. 9.6 The evaluation plan should identify relevant stakeholders who would be interested in the evaluation and who the findings should be shared with. It might also be worth seeking stakeholder views on the evaluation plan. 9.7 All evaluations need quantifiable measures for the general objective of the initiative being evaluated. A mix of indicators should be used, some of which might be behaviour-based (what people have done, what has actually happened) or perception-based (what people believe to have happened). It is important to attempt to measure: cause and effect: e.g. is an increase in participation the effect of public take-up of the new initiative or has increased participation caused public take-up? environmental factors or background noise : to what extent is increased participation the result of the initiative or of some other factors? the base case: i.e. what would have happened in the absence of the initiative?

12 9.8 When measuring the success or otherwise of initiatives to promote registration, EROs may wish to consider the following: whether the number of people registering to vote increases whether positive feedback is received from participants in a scheme whether people s understanding of the democratic process increases whether there has been an increase in requests for alternative formats 9.9 It is likely that a variety of methods will be used to evaluate a project. At the planning stage it is important to think about the most appropriate methods to use for evaluation. The following are some examples of different evaluation methods: distributing evaluation questionnaires at the end of an event recording feedback from the public at events or via the corporate website recording the number of new registrants recording the number of hits to the website requesting information about registration and/or absent voting conducting a public opinion survey to determine whether the public were aware of the initiative, their thoughts about it and whether they registered as a result pre-initiative and post-initiative surveys to determine whether people s knowledge and awareness of registration and the electoral process has increased as a result of the initiative interviews with stakeholders to determine what they thought of the initiative The evaluation plan needs to set out who and how many will participate in the evaluation. The evaluation plan should also determine who is going to be responsible for the various parts of the evaluation. The timetable should include implementation of the project, analysis and reporting of the evaluation Consideration should be given to the resources allocated to evaluating a particular project. The cost of the evaluation should be proportionate to the cost of the project, but a satisfactory account of the effectiveness of an individual programme cannot be given without evaluation Options 10.1 The Working Party is asked to consider what, if any, additional work needs to be undertaken to improve the accuracy of the Register of Electors The Working Party is asked to consider what, if any, additional work needs to be undertaken to increase public awareness of, and participation in, voter registration The Working Party will need to consider what financial and workforce implications are needed when undertaking any additional work, as these resources do not currently exist Corporate Implications 11.1 Financial and VAT Adoption of new initiatives will have financial implications and such implications would need to be considered within the final report to emerge from the Working Party.

13 11.2 Legal Section 69 of the Electoral Administration Act 2006 (EAA) gives Electoral Registration Officers a duty to take such steps as they think appropriate to encourage the participation of electors in their area in the electoral process Corporate The efficient conduct of the electoral registration process and elections is one of the highest-profile functions that the Council undertakes. Any challenge to these processes could result in adverse publicity and legal sanction against the Returning Officer/ ERO personally and the Council Equity and Equalities Amongst the roles undertaken by the ERO and Returning Officer are those of ensuring that equalities issues are addressed in the running of electoral registration and elections. Some of the areas identified within this report for possible further investigation could potentially have a direct impact upon equalities issues (section 6 in particular) Recommendations 12.1 The Working Party is asked to consider what, if any, additional work needs to be undertaken to improve the accuracy of the Register of Electors The Working Party is asked to consider what, if any, additional work needs to be undertaken to increase public awareness of, and participation in, voter registration The Working Party will need to consider what financial and workforce implications are needed when undertaking any additional work, as these resources do not currently exist Decision Making Process 13.1 The Working Party can make suggestions on how to improve the accuracy of the Register of Electors and increase public awareness of, and participation in, voter registration. The Working Party will present recommendations to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel. Final recommendations will be put to the Council s Electoral Registration Officer for approval, and any financial implications will need to be addressed at that stage. Contact Officer: Glenn Back, Democratic Services and Scrutiny Manager, ext 7187 Reporting to: Sue McGonigal, Electoral Registration Officer Background Papers Title Managing Electoral Registration in Great Britain EC Details of where to access copy Electoral Services Office

14 Corporate Consultation Undertaken Finance Legal Glossary of abbreviations ERO Electoral Registration Officer EC Electoral Commission EEA Electoral Administration Act 2006 HMOS Houses in multiple occupation