How could the PCC elections have been better run?

The UK is having its first elections for Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) tomorrow, (Thursday 15th November). Citizens will have the chance to elect an official who will have the powers to:

• appoint and dismiss chief constables
• set out a five-year police and crime plan 
• determine local policing priorities

Teresa May has claimed that they will 'be a voice for local people'.  Perhaps, perhaps not.  However, there is a real concern that their democratic role will be undermined by low turnout.  So what could have been done?  

Ways increase turnout - lessons from academic research

Low turnout is a problem because elected Commissioners may not be representative of broader public opinion.  It also reduces the legitimacy of Commissioners and perhaps their effectiveness too.

In some senses, low turnout would not be a surprise because voter turnout is generally lower in 'second order' and 'third order' elections.  Citizens vote in elections that they consider to be more important, such as general elections.  Turnout would probably have been low, whatever.

However, based on established academic research government could have done much more to avoid low turnout.  It could have:

• Hold the election at the weekend, not a Thursday.  Why?
• Some democracies hold elections at weekends and research suggests that this helps turnout.
• Better still, allow voting over several days.  Why?
• As the US election showed, many US states allow voting weeks in advance.  Why not allow voting to take place over several days?  Research shows how this can improve turnout.
• Provide more information about candidates. Why? 
• As I said before, research shows that providing free-post leaflets to candidates helps boost turnout.  The government decided against this and instead set up a website.  This is problematic because a significant amount of the UK still doesn't have internet access.  A telephone line for the public has been set up, but it has received criticisms.
• Hold the elections in May.  Why?
• November is a bad time for electoral officials who are busy updating the electoral register.  This means that they their resources are drained and they cannot invest in public awareness activities, as they might at other points in the year.  I interviewed many electoral administrators and they were concerned about a November election.
• More importantly, research shows that combining elections can help boost turnout.  If elections were combined with local or other elections in May, turnout might have been much higher.  Ideally, combine it with a general election.
• There have been some claims that November's 'early and dark nights' reduce turnout, I'm not aware of any research that demonstrates this.  But please correct me if I'm wrong.  
• Plan better.
• Research shows that errors made in the way that elections are run, voters' interactions with poll workers etc., can undermine confidence.  The Electoral Commission issued some early warnings that planning had not progressed sufficiently at the earlier stages.  There are some reports of leaflets not being delivered on time, problems with the telephone helpful for voters and confusion about who can and cannot be a candidate.  Some teething problems are inevitable, but they might have been avoided, and won't help turnout and public trust.

Electing Commissioners on the Cheap

The bottom line seems to be that the election could have been improved if more was spent on running it. Understandably, the government will be keen to keep costs down.   Primarily, they will be concerned about arguments from the Labour Party that the money spent on the election could have been spent on more police officers.

However, if we are to have PCCs then it is important that they are not elected on the cheap.  It undermines the eventual Commissioners, it undermines the police, and it undermines democracy

Is online registration a wolf in sheep's clothing?

Online voter registration was in the news last week.

In the US state of Washington citizens will be able to register to vote via Facebook.  This will use a piece of software developed specially by Facebook and Microsoft.

Meanwhile, in Britain, it was reported that Harrow has become the first local authority to allow online re-registration for those already on the electoral register.

Many electoral administrators around the world may therefore be looking to online registration to solve problems with the cost of elections and low registration rates.  As the Electoral Reform Society tweeted: '[b]earing in mind the UK's poor registration rates, is this the future?'.

A remedy for declining registration?

The development of online registration is especially important in Britain.  Here, the government's legislation to introduce individual electoral registration (IER) will have its second reading in the House of Lords on Tuesday.  My research on the effects of IER (a copy is also available on my website) found that we should expected IER to reduce electoral registration rates.  We therefore need other ways to increase registration rates in Britain to offset this decline.

The UK government has always been in favour of online registration and it published the eagerly awaited implementation plan for IER last week included.

Online registration is a good thing though, yes?  I've said so before. The logic is that by opening up as many methods of registering to vote as possible, registration rates will rise.  Citizens are increasingly online and government services need to adapt accordingly.

However, there might be a catch.  Faced with budget cuts electoral administrators may use online registration as a replacement for other methods.  This seems to be Harrow's thinking.  They have introduced it partly as a way of saving money.  Fortunately, they appear to be keeping the 'old fashioned' paper registration mechanisms too.

This line of thinking informed the government's decision to not pay for campaign literature for candidates for the UK's Police and Crime Commissioner elections.  Instead, of paying for one free leaflet per candidate, there would be one website on which citizens could find out about who was standing, and what for.  This was quickly criticised for reinforcing digital divides and reducing electoral participation.

There is also this recent research paper by Elizabeth A. Bennion (Indiana University) and  David W. Nickerson (University of Notre-Dame) which suggests that online registration can make citizens less likely to register.  Citizens need regular reminders, they claim, in order to re-register online.

The devil is therefore in the detail.  Citizen's experience of online registration therefore needs further research and its implementation in Washington, the UK and everywhere else should be carefully monitored.

Electoral musical chairs comes to Wales - will voters and politicians lose out?

Electoral law is in the news again in the UK, and this time it's Wales' turn. Radical plans to reduce the number of constituencies in Wales were published by the Boundary Commission this week. But what do they mean for Wales?

What is happening?

One of the first Bills introduced to the UK Parliament by the coalition government formed in May 2010 involved reducing the number of MPS from 650 to 600. The Coalition justified this on the basis that it would save the country money. The reputation of MPs was low at the time on the back of the expenses scandal so it was popular policy. However, partisan calculations were not doubt present as well.

Boundaries are proposed in the UK by independent bodies called Boundary Commissions, not by politicians themselves (thankfully!). Reducing the number of MPs requires reducing the number constituencies so they have been busy drawing up new proposal to cut the UK electoral map into 600 rather than 650 pieces. Plans have already been published for Scotland and England. This week it was Wales' turn.

What effect will it have for Wales?

Four main things:

Unfamiliar and confusing seats

First, old constituencies will largely go out the window. There will be 30 brand new constituencies and 15 will be wholly contained within a new constituency. Only 10 remain the same. You may need to check where your MP will be!

These new constituencies may be unfamiliar but also confusing. This is because the government has also stipulated that constituencies must be drawn up by maths and not communities. Boundaries used to be based on the idea of communities - MPs were to be elected to represent distinct communities, and electoral equality was secondary to that goal. The Boundary Commission had the thankless task of drawing up boundaries which are between nearly 73,000 and just over 80,000 voters. Many constituencies have therefore had to be broken up to meet this criteria. Small towns that used to be a constituency may not be big enough any more and might have to join with somewhere else. There will be some odd constituencies. One Plaid MP expressed concern about:

" two totally different communities being put together despite a large mountain separating them, as well as a number of proposals where two villages in the same community have been separated. We are also worried by the size of some of the proposed constituencies."

For example, Caerphilly will no longer have its own constituency because it will be twinned with Cardiff North. Llanelli will take some areas currently within the Gower boundary. Neath will expand to include parts of Gower, Swansea East and Aberavon. There'll be a new seat called Gower and Swansea West.

Less power for Wales in Westminster

Many people in Wales may not be concerned that 10 MPs will be losing their jobs - espeically at a time when many in Wales are losing theirs. But Wales and individual citizens will lose out. There will be fewer MPs at Westminister representing Wales. Most of Wales’ constituencies were around 57,000 citizens in size. The new electoral quota of c.76,000 registered voters means than Wales will have only 30 MPs, rather than 40. This cuts Wales' representation by a quarter. Architects of the system say that this is because Wales has long been overrepresented in Westminster in the past and the new changes make for equal representation. Nonetheless, Wales will have less influence in UK government as a result of these changes. Individual citizens may find that their MP is now more remote and less able to represent their views because they have to represent 75,000 citizens and not 53,000.

Career uncertainty for politicians

There will be considerable political uncertainly for MPs and in the longer term, AMs. Constituency redrawing always brings uncertainly for politicians because it makes their jobs unsafe. Many politicians have safe seats which they know they will win. However, this time it is an even more intense game of musical chairs with 10 seats being taken away. There will be a political scrap within parties for prize seats. Some high profile politicians may end up without a job.

More re-drawing for 2020

Further re-drawing may happen again very soon. The new system bases the constituencies on the number of registered voters in each constituency. However, the UK government is currently planning to make changes to the way that people register which is widely thought to reduce the number of people on the register. From 2014 it plans to introduce a system of individual registration which will make it more bureaucratic for a citizen to register to vote. When this was introduced in Northern Ireland in 2002 there was a 10% drop in the register, within the effect being greater in urban areas. If registration levels drop by 10% in the UK, then most constituencies will not be the right size anymore and another round of constituency redrawing may begin.

The government denies that a decline in levels of registration will occur as a result of plans to implement individual electoral registration. My own research suggests, that unless serious compensatory mechanisms are put in place, this will happen.

Who will gain?

The Conservatives in Westminster had become concerned with how the existing boundary system benefitted the Labour Party in general elections and this was one of the motives for the reforms. The changes will certainly help the Conservatives in 2015, although not as much as they might hope. It will however, effectively reduce representation in areas that do not support the Conservatives e.g. Wales and urban Britain in general.

Within Wales the position is different. Increasing the size of the constituencies tends to disadvantage the smaller parties – these being the Conservatives and the Liberals. The Conservatives and Liberals may find themselves with less Welsh representation in London – which would seem like an own goal.

If we get a new electoral system for the Welsh Assembly as a result of the constituency changes, then power within Wales will also be significantly affected.

What happens next?

The Boundary Commission has only published proposals. They will undertake public consultations (details are on their website) and voters can attend these and have their say about their constituency. There is time to make your views known.

The final proposals have also been to be approved by Parliament. It was initially thought that this approved was a given. The Coalition has a majority in government so would be very likely to approve their own plans. However, some Conservative MPs have become very concerned about how disruptive these plans have become - especially if their own seat is at risk. Baroness Warsi has said that ‘I agree with some of our MPs that some proposals are mad and insane’ . Mark Field MP has described the changes as ‘...somewhat more disruptive than we had in mind’. There is still every chance that the whole process might collapse and constituency redrawing never happens.

The Impact of Individual Registration on British Elections

The Coalition government proposes to fast-track individual electoral registration (IER) for British elections before the 2015 general election.

The proposals are currently being considered by the Select Committee on Political and Constitutional Reform.

My evidence to the Select Committee on Political and Constitutional Reform is now available online to download here.

The evidence draws from published studies on the effects that different forms of election administration have on voter registration and voter turnout. It also draws from interviews that I have undertaken as part of my ongoing research project on performance management in UK elections. I have interviewed senior election staff such as Returning Officers and Electoral Services Managers from 18 authorities since January 2011.

Levels of registration in the UK have been in decline for some years. My evidence suggests that IER is very likely to accelerate this decline. Although it is not considered in depth in this briefing, it is anticipated that voluntary registration is also likely to reduce the numbers on the electoral register.

IER would be one of the most significant changes to election administration that Britain has seen since becoming a democracy. It will force electoral administrators to undertake significant and costly administrative changes. At a time when a number of other changes are being made to electoral law in the UK, and local government budgets are being cut, there are concerns about the funding elections.

If IER is to be introduced then it is recommended that:

- Other provisions should be put in place to boost voter registration such as enabling voter registration when citizens access other government services. Lessons can be drawn from overseas innovations.

- The long-term funding of election administration is duly considered, given the context of local government cuts.

- Issues of voter accessibility are fully considered.

- The views of citizens towards the registration process should be carefully monitored towards the registration process once during and after the implementation of IER.

The Coalition government's White Paper is available here: http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/individual-electoral-registration-draft-bill.