Sunday, July 22, 2018
Is the Electoral Commission for purpose?
Since it was established by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 the Electoral Commission has impressed by just how unimpressive it has been.
Those of us involved with elections, whether as candidates and politicians or as administrators have seen many instances where their judgement and understanding have been drawn into question. For me it was their failure to properly administer the 2011 Assembly Election, when the names of candidates on party lists were kept off the ballot paper and promises to have them posted in polling stations instead were not kept.
It is little wonder then that the Commission's responsibilities have been scaled back over the years, but when it comes to their main role of ensuring fair play in elections they have either proven to be not up to the job, slow to act, or just lacking the teeth to do the job effectively.
I very much support therefore, the call by more than 40 cross-party MPs to beef up the Commission's powers after the official Brexit campaign was fined and reported to the police over breaches of spending laws. The Electoral Commission imposed a £61,000 fine on Vote Leave and referred David Halsall, the campaign’s “responsible person”, to the police for making false declarations of campaign spending, after it was found to have coordinated illegally with BeLeave, another Brexit group. The Independent reports:
In a letter to John Bercow, who chairs the speaker’s committee on the Electoral Commission, MPs said the findings show democracy could be “vulnerable to tampering and manipulation” and the watchdog needs tougher powers to restore public faith in the electoral system.
It comes amid calls from senior MPs for the Brexit referendum to be “rerun” after the sanctions against Vote Leave. Vote Leave said the electoral commission’s findings were “wholly inaccurate”.
Labour MP Stephen Kinnock, who helped to coordinate the letter, said the watchdog was an “analogue regulator in a digital age” and warned that “dark money and dark data” could flood the system without reform.
The suggested reforms include allowing the Electoral Commission to impose unlimited fines and to refer breaches to specialist police officers to investigate.
MPs also called for campaigns to be forced to declare their spending online, and outlined the need for tougher regulation for digital political advertising – something the commission itself has backed. “Until these reforms are instituted, our democracy will remain susceptible to future abuses like these,” the letter said.
“Looking ahead, we cannot in good conscience have another election or referendum without ensuring our polls are free and fair.”
Mr Kinnock said the democratic system was under attack from a mixture of foreign influence and abuses of the laws, describing the Vote Leave result as the “thin end of the wedge”.
The threats to our democracy are many and those seeking to subvert the process are using more and more sophisticated methods to cheat and to influence the result. If the regulator is not fit to deal with these threats then they need more powers and better sanctions.
They could also do with being more savvy about the methods being deployed to undermine our democracy so as to try and pre-empt the interference in the first place.
Those of us involved with elections, whether as candidates and politicians or as administrators have seen many instances where their judgement and understanding have been drawn into question. For me it was their failure to properly administer the 2011 Assembly Election, when the names of candidates on party lists were kept off the ballot paper and promises to have them posted in polling stations instead were not kept.
It is little wonder then that the Commission's responsibilities have been scaled back over the years, but when it comes to their main role of ensuring fair play in elections they have either proven to be not up to the job, slow to act, or just lacking the teeth to do the job effectively.
I very much support therefore, the call by more than 40 cross-party MPs to beef up the Commission's powers after the official Brexit campaign was fined and reported to the police over breaches of spending laws. The Electoral Commission imposed a £61,000 fine on Vote Leave and referred David Halsall, the campaign’s “responsible person”, to the police for making false declarations of campaign spending, after it was found to have coordinated illegally with BeLeave, another Brexit group. The Independent reports:
In a letter to John Bercow, who chairs the speaker’s committee on the Electoral Commission, MPs said the findings show democracy could be “vulnerable to tampering and manipulation” and the watchdog needs tougher powers to restore public faith in the electoral system.
It comes amid calls from senior MPs for the Brexit referendum to be “rerun” after the sanctions against Vote Leave. Vote Leave said the electoral commission’s findings were “wholly inaccurate”.
Labour MP Stephen Kinnock, who helped to coordinate the letter, said the watchdog was an “analogue regulator in a digital age” and warned that “dark money and dark data” could flood the system without reform.
The suggested reforms include allowing the Electoral Commission to impose unlimited fines and to refer breaches to specialist police officers to investigate.
MPs also called for campaigns to be forced to declare their spending online, and outlined the need for tougher regulation for digital political advertising – something the commission itself has backed. “Until these reforms are instituted, our democracy will remain susceptible to future abuses like these,” the letter said.
“Looking ahead, we cannot in good conscience have another election or referendum without ensuring our polls are free and fair.”
Mr Kinnock said the democratic system was under attack from a mixture of foreign influence and abuses of the laws, describing the Vote Leave result as the “thin end of the wedge”.
The threats to our democracy are many and those seeking to subvert the process are using more and more sophisticated methods to cheat and to influence the result. If the regulator is not fit to deal with these threats then they need more powers and better sanctions.
They could also do with being more savvy about the methods being deployed to undermine our democracy so as to try and pre-empt the interference in the first place.
