« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CONCLUSIONS
Following the criteria used in the evaluation of
previous election pilots, and which are set out on page 4
of the report, the conclusions of this report are as
follows:
- Success in facilitating Voting or Counting of
Votes. While there was some delay in the
distribution of postal votes, the processes adopted by
the Council appear to have worked successfully.
Electors were offered the option of either posting
their returns or delivering them to one of the three
ADPs. Training on the new
arrangements and in particular issues relating to
security and fraud, was given to those who staffed the
ADPs. The Count followed normal
procedures.
- Impact on Turnout. There is some
evidence to suggest that turnout was higher than it
would have been if the scheme had not applied. However,
there appears to be a small core of non-voters for whom
the mechanism for casting their votes makes no
difference to how likely they are to vote.
- Accessibility and Assistance Schemes.
The low number of calls (33) to the Council's helpline
suggests that local residents did not encounter
particular difficulties in voting. Returning Officer's
staff were available at the
ADPs and were prepared to visit
homes to assist electors in completing their ballot
papers. A voting device was also made available at the
Assistance and Delivery Points to assist those with
sight impairments. No electors requested this
assistance. Overall, around nine in ten (86%) voters
said their overall experience of casting their vote in
the by-election was '
good', including 61% who said it was
very good.
- Security and Fraud. While half of
respondents felt that voting by post was open to fraud
or abuse, no evidence was found to suggest that the
pilot scheme actually resulted in an increase in
personation or other malpractice. The post-election
integrity check carried out by the Council was
specifically designed as an additional security test
and it identified no evidence of fraud or malpractice.
The post-election survey showed that the concerns
expressed about postal voting do not stem from personal
experience but largely from concerns read or heard in
the media.
- Cost. The all postal process was
considerably more expensive than a by-election carried
out using conventional arrangements. It may be,
however, that there would be some economies of scale
were all postal elections to become more widely
used.
The findings of this evaluation largely support the main
thrust of the Council's own evaluation report and the
conclusions it draws directly relating to the electoral
pilot scheme. The conclusions are also broadly consistent
with the previous evaluations of all-postal vote pilot
schemes carried out by the Electoral Commission.
« Previous | Contents | Next »