The gaping hole in the voter registration changes

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/05/the-gaping-hole-in-the-voter-registration-changes

Version 0 of 1.

In bringing forward by a year the final implementation of electoral registers based entirely on individual registration, the minister for constitutional reform (Letters, 31 July) is overriding strong advice from the Electoral Commission. His claiming 96% accuracy hides the stark fact that the percentage of unconfirmed entries varies by local authority and range: from just over 0% to 23%, all in areas that will have at least one significant election in May 2016. 

The absence of vital information about unconfirmed voters, the commission wrote, “means that ministers would need to ask parliament to approve an important decision with no reliable information about how many redundant entries would be removed from the December 2015 registers and how many otherwise eligible electors would need to re-register individually in order to be able to participate in the 2016 polls”.

Among those missing from the register are those aged 16 and 17, who will shortly become eligible to vote. Numbers registered in May 2015, at 247,705, represented a fall of 47% from the last household canvass, when 470,398 young people were registered. The position may improve but won’t be clear until spring 2016.

The government intends that the registers published in December 2015 will be used as the basis for calculating the size of constituencies as part of the next UK parliamentary boundary review. London boroughs – including Brent, Hackney, Haringey, Lambeth, and Redbridge, with their high count of Labour voters – are among authorities that have 10% or over of their total registers unconfirmed. Hackney has the highest level, at 23%. No point to be made about gerrymandering there, then, minister. Hilary KitchinLondon

• John Penrose writes that individual electoral registration (IER) will not disenfranchise people. Not in law, it won’t, but published academic research shows how IER will lead to a further decline in registration levels. The logic is simple: the more bureaucratic the registration process is, the less people will engage in the democratic process.

The same research has also shown that IER has many side-effects. It can divert election officials’ time away from other activities, affect morale and cause staff to leave. This is borne out by a recent report by electoral administrators, which the minister cites in support of his argument.

Despite the introduction of online electoral registration last year, which was a huge step forward, the numbers on the electoral roll are at crisis levels, with a dramatic decline in the post-war era. Millions are not on the roll.

There is a need for an urgent electoral modernisation programme to address this. Again, academic studies are instructive. Mechanisms that could work include: a “motor voter” law that registers citizens when they access other government services, better funding for electoral officials, civil society actors to promote voter engagement, later registration deadlines, and easier voting procedures.Dr Toby JamesUniversity of East Anglia