Reforming electoral law

ldquoThere is an urgent need for simplified and modernised electoral lawFor too long the UKrsquos governments have allowed electoral law to grow ever more complex and unwieldly This is not just a technical or legal problem ndash there are real costs and consequences for voters campaigners and election officials

It is time for governments and political parties to commit to the urgent need for comprehensive change and prioritise the time and resources needed to deliver meaningful improvement We cannot afford to risk the hard-won confidence of voters and campaigners in our elections and referendumsrdquo

Bob Posner Chief Executive of the Electoral Commission

Why is electoral law importantThe UKrsquos electoral and political finance laws provide the lsquorules of the gamersquo that underpin fairness trust and confidence in our democratic processes

These laws ensure the UKrsquos election processes and results are trusted and accepted as legitimate and that funding and spending at elections and referendums is transparent They level the campaign playing field to ensure elections are not unduly influenced

Why does it need to changeElectoral law is increasingly complex and outdated This brings increased risks for voters candidates and campaigners electoral administrators regulators and governments

We still rely on legislation dating back to

1872 The Ballot Act

1883 The Corrupt and Illegal Practices Act

1983The Representation of the People Act ndash last time there was consolidation of electoral law

Since then the UK has gone digital

Percentage of advertising budget spent on digital

2015 general election

24 2017

general election

43 Many electoral offences date back to the 19th century

Some criminal offences are created by remarkably inaccessible and tortuous forms of legislative drafting[hellip] The consequence is that trying to work out exactly what electoral offences existed as a result of the 2011 Act is an extremely cumbersome processrdquo

James Chalmers and Fiona Leverick School of Law University of Glasgow

ldquoA person shall be guilty of undue influence if he inflicts

or threatens to inflict any temporal or spiritual

injury damage harm or loss in order to induce or

compel that person to vote or refrain from votingrdquo

There are more than 50 Acts and over 170 Statutory Instruments relating to the delivery of elections

2

What needs to change

Implement the Law Commissionsrsquo recommendations

Between 2012 and 2016 the UKrsquos Law Commissions worked together to carry out a thorough and comprehensive review of electoral law The Law Commissionsrsquo proposals have provided a well-researched and widely supported basis for further work on electoral law reform We call on the UKrsquos governments and parliaments to take forward these recommendations

Adopt a holistic approach and resist piecemeal reform

A piecemeal approach to electoral law reform leads to further complexity and increases the risk of inadvertently introducing inconsistency or contradictions between different pieces of law Instead we need a more comprehensive approach to provide clear accessible modern electoral law We want to see a new overarching UK elections Act brought forward supported by new elections regulations Similar legislation is also needed in Scotland and Wales to simplify and modernise the law relating to elections where law-making powers are devolved

In 2018 mayoral elections were held on the same day as

local elections

Electoral administrators had to refer to

11 pieces of primary legislation and

6 pieces of secondary legislation

42 of people donrsquot believe that campaign spending and funding of political parties and candidates is open and transparent

19 of people donrsquot believe the authorities will take action if a political party or campaigner is caught breaking the rules

Sanctions

When parties and campaigners break electoral law the maximum fine we can impose is pound20000 for each offence Since 2017 we have imposed this maximum fine ten times Campaigners and parties are spending significant sums of money often millions on campaigns to influence voters We are concerned that a pound20000 fine could be seen as the cost of doing business This should be increased to ensure that sanctions are proportionate and provide a genuine deterrent to campaigners An increase would bring our sanctions in line with other regulators such as the ICO who where appropriate levy fines in the pound100000s

ldquoReturning officers and electoral administrators need to be able to make decisions quickly sometimes within minutes especially on polling day The way things stand currently itrsquos a nightmare It can be very difficult to find the information we need If you donrsquot know where to look it could take hoursrdquo

Louise Round Returning Officer and Chief Executive of Tandridge District Council

3

Bring candidate regulation into the Electoral Commissionrsquos remit

Our remit should be extended to cover enforcement of candidate finance in addition to party and campaigner finance This change would mean that rather than facing criminal sanctions as the law currently requires candidate offences could be addressed where appropriate with civil sanctions just as many party and campaigner offences are This would be fairer to candidates and would free up police and court time reduce the risk of an enforcement gap give voters confidence that there is a clear single regulator of political finance and provide for a more proportionate regulatory system

Reflect advances in digital campaigning

The nature of campaigning at elections and referendums has changed significantly over recent years Yet electoral law was designed and written before campaigning went digital when campaign materials were mostly printed hand delivered or posted This fails to reflect todayrsquos digital society where an increasing proportion of spending by campaigners goes into online advertising We need legislation that ensures digital campaign materials contain information about who is responsible for producing and distributing them to voters Voters should be able to see clearly who is spending money online to influence them at elections and referendums in the same way that they can with printed material Changes should also be made to strengthen the Commissionrsquos powers to compel social media companies to disclose information

ldquoItrsquos peanuts isnrsquot it Theyrsquore not going to stop doing it for a pound20000 finerdquo

Member of the public Sheffield

Maximum fine when electoral law is broken

pound20000

Maximum a party could spend in a general election

pound19m4

Modernise electoral offences

Electoral offences need to be simplified and modernised Many existing electoral offences are so outdated and poorly drafted that they are not well-understood and sometimes not easily enforced Many date back to the threats faced by our electoral process in the 1800s including for example frequent outbreaks of drunken election rioting largesse of wealthy land-owning candidates attempting to influence electors to vote for them by plying them with ldquomeat and drinkrdquo and threats of religious excommunication for voting in a certain way

Modernise the legal challenge process

Petitions are the current process for legally challenging an election They can take a year or more to be resolved leading to unnecessarily burdensome costs for claimants and the courts And if the petitioner loses they will be liable for the other partiesrsquo costs meaning valid challenges may not be raised because of the expense This time consuming process can lead to prolonged uncertainty as to the rightful holder of elected office which is problematic for candidates parties and voters alike Petitions should be incorporated into the ordinary court process so that it is easier for voters and candidates to challenge the outcome of an election if there is evidence that it has not been delivered in accordance with the law

Prevent postal vote fraud

We do not believe it is appropriate for campaigners to be directly involved in the administration of voting processes including completing absent vote applications and postal ballot packs This creates a risk of electoral fraud and a perception among voters that inappropriate activity is taking place We want to see legislation that stops campaigners handling postal votes

Extend the Northern Ireland transparency rules back to 2014

Transparency builds trust and confidence so itrsquos vital that voters can see and understand how political parties and campaigners are funded and how they spend their money The rules state that political parties and campaign groups must provide information on donations and loans which we then publish But until recently these rules did not extend fully to Northern Ireland and we were not permitted to publish or share any donation and loan information relating to these parties In 2018 legislation was introduced allowing us to publish this information from July 2017 onwards but we cannot disclose information from before that point We want Northern Irelandrsquos transparency rules backdated to January 2014 as Parliament originally intended This would open up a period of intense electoral activity to scrutiny taking in two UK Parliamentary general elections two Northern Ireland Assembly elections European Parliament and local government elections and the EU referendum

It can cost an individual up to pound5500

to challenge the outcome of a parliamentary election in the UK These costs will increase

substantially if the challenge goes to trial

It costs pound330 in Australia pound500 in New Zealand and pound640 in Canada

5

What are the risks if we donrsquot actHistorically UK electoral processes and regulation have been robust and effective However if we do not ensure clear simple and up-to-date electoral and political finance laws vitally important processes will be weakened and less effective and public confidence will be reduced

Failure to act now poses a number of risks

bull Innovation and improvement will be stifled

Electoral law currently stipulates the use of particular forms deadlines and even specific accessibility devices used in polling stations If the law doesnrsquot change we risk holding back genuine innovation that could greatly improve the electoral experience for voters campaigners parties and candidates

bull Voters will be discouraged

Potential voters may find that important aspects of registering voting and campaign transparency are so old-fashioned or opaque that they donrsquot have enough trust in politicians or elections to cast their vote

bull Good candidates and competent elections agents will be discouraged

The longer that electoral law remains complex and unclear the more likely it is that able people will be reluctant to stand for election for fear of inadvertently breaking the law Conversely deliberate breaches may go undetected and encourage corruption in our elections

bull Governments will face disproportionate and unnecessary complexity

Simplified and modernised electoral law would serve as the foundation for any future reform If it is not changed now governments are likely to find it harder to deliver the policy changes that are most important to them and to voters

bull Relationships between laws for UK and devolved elections will become more complex

Electoral law reform should enable and support policy diversity between elections for different bodies within the UK However legislation dealing with the underlying technical or administrative detail should not need to vary dramatically between elections in different parts of the UK The aim should be to provide the strongest possible common foundation for delivering well run polls in different scenarios

Electoral Commission published sources

Digital campaigning Increasing transparency or voters 2018

Political finance regulation and digital campaigning A public perspective 2018

Challenging elections in the UK 2012

Winter tracker 2019

6

ldquoThere is an urgent need for simplified and modernised electoral lawFor too long the UKrsquos governments have allowed electoral law to grow ever more complex and unwieldly This is not just a technical or legal problem ndash there are real costs and consequences for voters campaigners and election officials

It is time for governments and political parties to commit to the urgent need for comprehensive change and prioritise the time and resources needed to deliver meaningful improvement We cannot afford to risk the hard-won confidence of voters and campaigners in our elections and referendumsrdquo

Bob Posner Chief Executive of the Electoral Commission

Why is electoral law importantThe UKrsquos electoral and political finance laws provide the lsquorules of the gamersquo that underpin fairness trust and confidence in our democratic processes

These laws ensure the UKrsquos election processes and results are trusted and accepted as legitimate and that funding and spending at elections and referendums is transparent They level the campaign playing field to ensure elections are not unduly influenced

Why does it need to changeElectoral law is increasingly complex and outdated This brings increased risks for voters candidates and campaigners electoral administrators regulators and governments

We still rely on legislation dating back to

1872 The Ballot Act

1883 The Corrupt and Illegal Practices Act

1983The Representation of the People Act ndash last time there was consolidation of electoral law

Since then the UK has gone digital

Percentage of advertising budget spent on digital

2015 general election

24 2017

general election

43 Many electoral offences date back to the 19th century

Some criminal offences are created by remarkably inaccessible and tortuous forms of legislative drafting[hellip] The consequence is that trying to work out exactly what electoral offences existed as a result of the 2011 Act is an extremely cumbersome processrdquo

James Chalmers and Fiona Leverick School of Law University of Glasgow

ldquoA person shall be guilty of undue influence if he inflicts

or threatens to inflict any temporal or spiritual

injury damage harm or loss in order to induce or

compel that person to vote or refrain from votingrdquo

There are more than 50 Acts and over 170 Statutory Instruments relating to the delivery of elections

2

What needs to change

Implement the Law Commissionsrsquo recommendations

Between 2012 and 2016 the UKrsquos Law Commissions worked together to carry out a thorough and comprehensive review of electoral law The Law Commissionsrsquo proposals have provided a well-researched and widely supported basis for further work on electoral law reform We call on the UKrsquos governments and parliaments to take forward these recommendations

Adopt a holistic approach and resist piecemeal reform

A piecemeal approach to electoral law reform leads to further complexity and increases the risk of inadvertently introducing inconsistency or contradictions between different pieces of law Instead we need a more comprehensive approach to provide clear accessible modern electoral law We want to see a new overarching UK elections Act brought forward supported by new elections regulations Similar legislation is also needed in Scotland and Wales to simplify and modernise the law relating to elections where law-making powers are devolved

In 2018 mayoral elections were held on the same day as

local elections

Electoral administrators had to refer to

11 pieces of primary legislation and

6 pieces of secondary legislation

42 of people donrsquot believe that campaign spending and funding of political parties and candidates is open and transparent

19 of people donrsquot believe the authorities will take action if a political party or campaigner is caught breaking the rules

Sanctions

When parties and campaigners break electoral law the maximum fine we can impose is pound20000 for each offence Since 2017 we have imposed this maximum fine ten times Campaigners and parties are spending significant sums of money often millions on campaigns to influence voters We are concerned that a pound20000 fine could be seen as the cost of doing business This should be increased to ensure that sanctions are proportionate and provide a genuine deterrent to campaigners An increase would bring our sanctions in line with other regulators such as the ICO who where appropriate levy fines in the pound100000s

ldquoReturning officers and electoral administrators need to be able to make decisions quickly sometimes within minutes especially on polling day The way things stand currently itrsquos a nightmare It can be very difficult to find the information we need If you donrsquot know where to look it could take hoursrdquo

Louise Round Returning Officer and Chief Executive of Tandridge District Council

3

Bring candidate regulation into the Electoral Commissionrsquos remit

Our remit should be extended to cover enforcement of candidate finance in addition to party and campaigner finance This change would mean that rather than facing criminal sanctions as the law currently requires candidate offences could be addressed where appropriate with civil sanctions just as many party and campaigner offences are This would be fairer to candidates and would free up police and court time reduce the risk of an enforcement gap give voters confidence that there is a clear single regulator of political finance and provide for a more proportionate regulatory system

Reflect advances in digital campaigning

The nature of campaigning at elections and referendums has changed significantly over recent years Yet electoral law was designed and written before campaigning went digital when campaign materials were mostly printed hand delivered or posted This fails to reflect todayrsquos digital society where an increasing proportion of spending by campaigners goes into online advertising We need legislation that ensures digital campaign materials contain information about who is responsible for producing and distributing them to voters Voters should be able to see clearly who is spending money online to influence them at elections and referendums in the same way that they can with printed material Changes should also be made to strengthen the Commissionrsquos powers to compel social media companies to disclose information

ldquoItrsquos peanuts isnrsquot it Theyrsquore not going to stop doing it for a pound20000 finerdquo

Member of the public Sheffield

Maximum fine when electoral law is broken

pound20000

Maximum a party could spend in a general election

pound19m4

Modernise electoral offences

Electoral offences need to be simplified and modernised Many existing electoral offences are so outdated and poorly drafted that they are not well-understood and sometimes not easily enforced Many date back to the threats faced by our electoral process in the 1800s including for example frequent outbreaks of drunken election rioting largesse of wealthy land-owning candidates attempting to influence electors to vote for them by plying them with ldquomeat and drinkrdquo and threats of religious excommunication for voting in a certain way

Modernise the legal challenge process

Petitions are the current process for legally challenging an election They can take a year or more to be resolved leading to unnecessarily burdensome costs for claimants and the courts And if the petitioner loses they will be liable for the other partiesrsquo costs meaning valid challenges may not be raised because of the expense This time consuming process can lead to prolonged uncertainty as to the rightful holder of elected office which is problematic for candidates parties and voters alike Petitions should be incorporated into the ordinary court process so that it is easier for voters and candidates to challenge the outcome of an election if there is evidence that it has not been delivered in accordance with the law

Prevent postal vote fraud

We do not believe it is appropriate for campaigners to be directly involved in the administration of voting processes including completing absent vote applications and postal ballot packs This creates a risk of electoral fraud and a perception among voters that inappropriate activity is taking place We want to see legislation that stops campaigners handling postal votes

Extend the Northern Ireland transparency rules back to 2014

Transparency builds trust and confidence so itrsquos vital that voters can see and understand how political parties and campaigners are funded and how they spend their money The rules state that political parties and campaign groups must provide information on donations and loans which we then publish But until recently these rules did not extend fully to Northern Ireland and we were not permitted to publish or share any donation and loan information relating to these parties In 2018 legislation was introduced allowing us to publish this information from July 2017 onwards but we cannot disclose information from before that point We want Northern Irelandrsquos transparency rules backdated to January 2014 as Parliament originally intended This would open up a period of intense electoral activity to scrutiny taking in two UK Parliamentary general elections two Northern Ireland Assembly elections European Parliament and local government elections and the EU referendum

It can cost an individual up to pound5500

to challenge the outcome of a parliamentary election in the UK These costs will increase

substantially if the challenge goes to trial

It costs pound330 in Australia pound500 in New Zealand and pound640 in Canada

5

What are the risks if we donrsquot actHistorically UK electoral processes and regulation have been robust and effective However if we do not ensure clear simple and up-to-date electoral and political finance laws vitally important processes will be weakened and less effective and public confidence will be reduced

Failure to act now poses a number of risks

bull Innovation and improvement will be stifled

Electoral law currently stipulates the use of particular forms deadlines and even specific accessibility devices used in polling stations If the law doesnrsquot change we risk holding back genuine innovation that could greatly improve the electoral experience for voters campaigners parties and candidates

bull Voters will be discouraged

Potential voters may find that important aspects of registering voting and campaign transparency are so old-fashioned or opaque that they donrsquot have enough trust in politicians or elections to cast their vote

bull Good candidates and competent elections agents will be discouraged

The longer that electoral law remains complex and unclear the more likely it is that able people will be reluctant to stand for election for fear of inadvertently breaking the law Conversely deliberate breaches may go undetected and encourage corruption in our elections

bull Governments will face disproportionate and unnecessary complexity

Simplified and modernised electoral law would serve as the foundation for any future reform If it is not changed now governments are likely to find it harder to deliver the policy changes that are most important to them and to voters

bull Relationships between laws for UK and devolved elections will become more complex

Electoral law reform should enable and support policy diversity between elections for different bodies within the UK However legislation dealing with the underlying technical or administrative detail should not need to vary dramatically between elections in different parts of the UK The aim should be to provide the strongest possible common foundation for delivering well run polls in different scenarios

Electoral Commission published sources

Digital campaigning Increasing transparency or voters 2018

Political finance regulation and digital campaigning A public perspective 2018

Challenging elections in the UK 2012

Winter tracker 2019

6

What needs to change

Implement the Law Commissionsrsquo recommendations

Between 2012 and 2016 the UKrsquos Law Commissions worked together to carry out a thorough and comprehensive review of electoral law The Law Commissionsrsquo proposals have provided a well-researched and widely supported basis for further work on electoral law reform We call on the UKrsquos governments and parliaments to take forward these recommendations

Adopt a holistic approach and resist piecemeal reform

A piecemeal approach to electoral law reform leads to further complexity and increases the risk of inadvertently introducing inconsistency or contradictions between different pieces of law Instead we need a more comprehensive approach to provide clear accessible modern electoral law We want to see a new overarching UK elections Act brought forward supported by new elections regulations Similar legislation is also needed in Scotland and Wales to simplify and modernise the law relating to elections where law-making powers are devolved

In 2018 mayoral elections were held on the same day as

local elections

Electoral administrators had to refer to

11 pieces of primary legislation and

6 pieces of secondary legislation

42 of people donrsquot believe that campaign spending and funding of political parties and candidates is open and transparent

19 of people donrsquot believe the authorities will take action if a political party or campaigner is caught breaking the rules

Sanctions

When parties and campaigners break electoral law the maximum fine we can impose is pound20000 for each offence Since 2017 we have imposed this maximum fine ten times Campaigners and parties are spending significant sums of money often millions on campaigns to influence voters We are concerned that a pound20000 fine could be seen as the cost of doing business This should be increased to ensure that sanctions are proportionate and provide a genuine deterrent to campaigners An increase would bring our sanctions in line with other regulators such as the ICO who where appropriate levy fines in the pound100000s

ldquoReturning officers and electoral administrators need to be able to make decisions quickly sometimes within minutes especially on polling day The way things stand currently itrsquos a nightmare It can be very difficult to find the information we need If you donrsquot know where to look it could take hoursrdquo

Louise Round Returning Officer and Chief Executive of Tandridge District Council

3

Bring candidate regulation into the Electoral Commissionrsquos remit

Our remit should be extended to cover enforcement of candidate finance in addition to party and campaigner finance This change would mean that rather than facing criminal sanctions as the law currently requires candidate offences could be addressed where appropriate with civil sanctions just as many party and campaigner offences are This would be fairer to candidates and would free up police and court time reduce the risk of an enforcement gap give voters confidence that there is a clear single regulator of political finance and provide for a more proportionate regulatory system

Reflect advances in digital campaigning

The nature of campaigning at elections and referendums has changed significantly over recent years Yet electoral law was designed and written before campaigning went digital when campaign materials were mostly printed hand delivered or posted This fails to reflect todayrsquos digital society where an increasing proportion of spending by campaigners goes into online advertising We need legislation that ensures digital campaign materials contain information about who is responsible for producing and distributing them to voters Voters should be able to see clearly who is spending money online to influence them at elections and referendums in the same way that they can with printed material Changes should also be made to strengthen the Commissionrsquos powers to compel social media companies to disclose information

ldquoItrsquos peanuts isnrsquot it Theyrsquore not going to stop doing it for a pound20000 finerdquo

Member of the public Sheffield

Maximum fine when electoral law is broken

pound20000

Maximum a party could spend in a general election

pound19m4

Modernise electoral offences

Electoral offences need to be simplified and modernised Many existing electoral offences are so outdated and poorly drafted that they are not well-understood and sometimes not easily enforced Many date back to the threats faced by our electoral process in the 1800s including for example frequent outbreaks of drunken election rioting largesse of wealthy land-owning candidates attempting to influence electors to vote for them by plying them with ldquomeat and drinkrdquo and threats of religious excommunication for voting in a certain way

Modernise the legal challenge process

Petitions are the current process for legally challenging an election They can take a year or more to be resolved leading to unnecessarily burdensome costs for claimants and the courts And if the petitioner loses they will be liable for the other partiesrsquo costs meaning valid challenges may not be raised because of the expense This time consuming process can lead to prolonged uncertainty as to the rightful holder of elected office which is problematic for candidates parties and voters alike Petitions should be incorporated into the ordinary court process so that it is easier for voters and candidates to challenge the outcome of an election if there is evidence that it has not been delivered in accordance with the law

Prevent postal vote fraud

We do not believe it is appropriate for campaigners to be directly involved in the administration of voting processes including completing absent vote applications and postal ballot packs This creates a risk of electoral fraud and a perception among voters that inappropriate activity is taking place We want to see legislation that stops campaigners handling postal votes

Extend the Northern Ireland transparency rules back to 2014

Transparency builds trust and confidence so itrsquos vital that voters can see and understand how political parties and campaigners are funded and how they spend their money The rules state that political parties and campaign groups must provide information on donations and loans which we then publish But until recently these rules did not extend fully to Northern Ireland and we were not permitted to publish or share any donation and loan information relating to these parties In 2018 legislation was introduced allowing us to publish this information from July 2017 onwards but we cannot disclose information from before that point We want Northern Irelandrsquos transparency rules backdated to January 2014 as Parliament originally intended This would open up a period of intense electoral activity to scrutiny taking in two UK Parliamentary general elections two Northern Ireland Assembly elections European Parliament and local government elections and the EU referendum

It can cost an individual up to pound5500

to challenge the outcome of a parliamentary election in the UK These costs will increase

substantially if the challenge goes to trial

It costs pound330 in Australia pound500 in New Zealand and pound640 in Canada

5

What are the risks if we donrsquot actHistorically UK electoral processes and regulation have been robust and effective However if we do not ensure clear simple and up-to-date electoral and political finance laws vitally important processes will be weakened and less effective and public confidence will be reduced

Failure to act now poses a number of risks

bull Innovation and improvement will be stifled

Electoral law currently stipulates the use of particular forms deadlines and even specific accessibility devices used in polling stations If the law doesnrsquot change we risk holding back genuine innovation that could greatly improve the electoral experience for voters campaigners parties and candidates

bull Voters will be discouraged

Potential voters may find that important aspects of registering voting and campaign transparency are so old-fashioned or opaque that they donrsquot have enough trust in politicians or elections to cast their vote

bull Good candidates and competent elections agents will be discouraged

The longer that electoral law remains complex and unclear the more likely it is that able people will be reluctant to stand for election for fear of inadvertently breaking the law Conversely deliberate breaches may go undetected and encourage corruption in our elections

bull Governments will face disproportionate and unnecessary complexity

Simplified and modernised electoral law would serve as the foundation for any future reform If it is not changed now governments are likely to find it harder to deliver the policy changes that are most important to them and to voters

bull Relationships between laws for UK and devolved elections will become more complex

Electoral law reform should enable and support policy diversity between elections for different bodies within the UK However legislation dealing with the underlying technical or administrative detail should not need to vary dramatically between elections in different parts of the UK The aim should be to provide the strongest possible common foundation for delivering well run polls in different scenarios

Electoral Commission published sources

Digital campaigning Increasing transparency or voters 2018

Political finance regulation and digital campaigning A public perspective 2018

Challenging elections in the UK 2012

Winter tracker 2019

6

Bring candidate regulation into the Electoral Commissionrsquos remit

Our remit should be extended to cover enforcement of candidate finance in addition to party and campaigner finance This change would mean that rather than facing criminal sanctions as the law currently requires candidate offences could be addressed where appropriate with civil sanctions just as many party and campaigner offences are This would be fairer to candidates and would free up police and court time reduce the risk of an enforcement gap give voters confidence that there is a clear single regulator of political finance and provide for a more proportionate regulatory system

Reflect advances in digital campaigning

The nature of campaigning at elections and referendums has changed significantly over recent years Yet electoral law was designed and written before campaigning went digital when campaign materials were mostly printed hand delivered or posted This fails to reflect todayrsquos digital society where an increasing proportion of spending by campaigners goes into online advertising We need legislation that ensures digital campaign materials contain information about who is responsible for producing and distributing them to voters Voters should be able to see clearly who is spending money online to influence them at elections and referendums in the same way that they can with printed material Changes should also be made to strengthen the Commissionrsquos powers to compel social media companies to disclose information

ldquoItrsquos peanuts isnrsquot it Theyrsquore not going to stop doing it for a pound20000 finerdquo

Member of the public Sheffield

Maximum fine when electoral law is broken

pound20000

Maximum a party could spend in a general election

pound19m4

Modernise electoral offences

Electoral offences need to be simplified and modernised Many existing electoral offences are so outdated and poorly drafted that they are not well-understood and sometimes not easily enforced Many date back to the threats faced by our electoral process in the 1800s including for example frequent outbreaks of drunken election rioting largesse of wealthy land-owning candidates attempting to influence electors to vote for them by plying them with ldquomeat and drinkrdquo and threats of religious excommunication for voting in a certain way

Modernise the legal challenge process

Petitions are the current process for legally challenging an election They can take a year or more to be resolved leading to unnecessarily burdensome costs for claimants and the courts And if the petitioner loses they will be liable for the other partiesrsquo costs meaning valid challenges may not be raised because of the expense This time consuming process can lead to prolonged uncertainty as to the rightful holder of elected office which is problematic for candidates parties and voters alike Petitions should be incorporated into the ordinary court process so that it is easier for voters and candidates to challenge the outcome of an election if there is evidence that it has not been delivered in accordance with the law

Prevent postal vote fraud

We do not believe it is appropriate for campaigners to be directly involved in the administration of voting processes including completing absent vote applications and postal ballot packs This creates a risk of electoral fraud and a perception among voters that inappropriate activity is taking place We want to see legislation that stops campaigners handling postal votes

Extend the Northern Ireland transparency rules back to 2014

Transparency builds trust and confidence so itrsquos vital that voters can see and understand how political parties and campaigners are funded and how they spend their money The rules state that political parties and campaign groups must provide information on donations and loans which we then publish But until recently these rules did not extend fully to Northern Ireland and we were not permitted to publish or share any donation and loan information relating to these parties In 2018 legislation was introduced allowing us to publish this information from July 2017 onwards but we cannot disclose information from before that point We want Northern Irelandrsquos transparency rules backdated to January 2014 as Parliament originally intended This would open up a period of intense electoral activity to scrutiny taking in two UK Parliamentary general elections two Northern Ireland Assembly elections European Parliament and local government elections and the EU referendum

It can cost an individual up to pound5500

to challenge the outcome of a parliamentary election in the UK These costs will increase

substantially if the challenge goes to trial

It costs pound330 in Australia pound500 in New Zealand and pound640 in Canada

5

What are the risks if we donrsquot actHistorically UK electoral processes and regulation have been robust and effective However if we do not ensure clear simple and up-to-date electoral and political finance laws vitally important processes will be weakened and less effective and public confidence will be reduced

Failure to act now poses a number of risks

bull Innovation and improvement will be stifled

Electoral law currently stipulates the use of particular forms deadlines and even specific accessibility devices used in polling stations If the law doesnrsquot change we risk holding back genuine innovation that could greatly improve the electoral experience for voters campaigners parties and candidates

bull Voters will be discouraged

Potential voters may find that important aspects of registering voting and campaign transparency are so old-fashioned or opaque that they donrsquot have enough trust in politicians or elections to cast their vote

bull Good candidates and competent elections agents will be discouraged

The longer that electoral law remains complex and unclear the more likely it is that able people will be reluctant to stand for election for fear of inadvertently breaking the law Conversely deliberate breaches may go undetected and encourage corruption in our elections

bull Governments will face disproportionate and unnecessary complexity

Simplified and modernised electoral law would serve as the foundation for any future reform If it is not changed now governments are likely to find it harder to deliver the policy changes that are most important to them and to voters

bull Relationships between laws for UK and devolved elections will become more complex

Electoral law reform should enable and support policy diversity between elections for different bodies within the UK However legislation dealing with the underlying technical or administrative detail should not need to vary dramatically between elections in different parts of the UK The aim should be to provide the strongest possible common foundation for delivering well run polls in different scenarios

Electoral Commission published sources

Digital campaigning Increasing transparency or voters 2018

Political finance regulation and digital campaigning A public perspective 2018

Challenging elections in the UK 2012

Winter tracker 2019

6

Modernise electoral offences

Electoral offences need to be simplified and modernised Many existing electoral offences are so outdated and poorly drafted that they are not well-understood and sometimes not easily enforced Many date back to the threats faced by our electoral process in the 1800s including for example frequent outbreaks of drunken election rioting largesse of wealthy land-owning candidates attempting to influence electors to vote for them by plying them with ldquomeat and drinkrdquo and threats of religious excommunication for voting in a certain way

Modernise the legal challenge process

Petitions are the current process for legally challenging an election They can take a year or more to be resolved leading to unnecessarily burdensome costs for claimants and the courts And if the petitioner loses they will be liable for the other partiesrsquo costs meaning valid challenges may not be raised because of the expense This time consuming process can lead to prolonged uncertainty as to the rightful holder of elected office which is problematic for candidates parties and voters alike Petitions should be incorporated into the ordinary court process so that it is easier for voters and candidates to challenge the outcome of an election if there is evidence that it has not been delivered in accordance with the law

Prevent postal vote fraud

We do not believe it is appropriate for campaigners to be directly involved in the administration of voting processes including completing absent vote applications and postal ballot packs This creates a risk of electoral fraud and a perception among voters that inappropriate activity is taking place We want to see legislation that stops campaigners handling postal votes

Extend the Northern Ireland transparency rules back to 2014

Transparency builds trust and confidence so itrsquos vital that voters can see and understand how political parties and campaigners are funded and how they spend their money The rules state that political parties and campaign groups must provide information on donations and loans which we then publish But until recently these rules did not extend fully to Northern Ireland and we were not permitted to publish or share any donation and loan information relating to these parties In 2018 legislation was introduced allowing us to publish this information from July 2017 onwards but we cannot disclose information from before that point We want Northern Irelandrsquos transparency rules backdated to January 2014 as Parliament originally intended This would open up a period of intense electoral activity to scrutiny taking in two UK Parliamentary general elections two Northern Ireland Assembly elections European Parliament and local government elections and the EU referendum

It can cost an individual up to pound5500

to challenge the outcome of a parliamentary election in the UK These costs will increase

substantially if the challenge goes to trial

It costs pound330 in Australia pound500 in New Zealand and pound640 in Canada

5

What are the risks if we donrsquot actHistorically UK electoral processes and regulation have been robust and effective However if we do not ensure clear simple and up-to-date electoral and political finance laws vitally important processes will be weakened and less effective and public confidence will be reduced

Failure to act now poses a number of risks

bull Innovation and improvement will be stifled

Electoral law currently stipulates the use of particular forms deadlines and even specific accessibility devices used in polling stations If the law doesnrsquot change we risk holding back genuine innovation that could greatly improve the electoral experience for voters campaigners parties and candidates

bull Voters will be discouraged

Potential voters may find that important aspects of registering voting and campaign transparency are so old-fashioned or opaque that they donrsquot have enough trust in politicians or elections to cast their vote

bull Good candidates and competent elections agents will be discouraged

The longer that electoral law remains complex and unclear the more likely it is that able people will be reluctant to stand for election for fear of inadvertently breaking the law Conversely deliberate breaches may go undetected and encourage corruption in our elections

bull Governments will face disproportionate and unnecessary complexity

Simplified and modernised electoral law would serve as the foundation for any future reform If it is not changed now governments are likely to find it harder to deliver the policy changes that are most important to them and to voters

bull Relationships between laws for UK and devolved elections will become more complex

Electoral law reform should enable and support policy diversity between elections for different bodies within the UK However legislation dealing with the underlying technical or administrative detail should not need to vary dramatically between elections in different parts of the UK The aim should be to provide the strongest possible common foundation for delivering well run polls in different scenarios

Electoral Commission published sources

Digital campaigning Increasing transparency or voters 2018

Political finance regulation and digital campaigning A public perspective 2018

Challenging elections in the UK 2012

Winter tracker 2019

6

What are the risks if we donrsquot actHistorically UK electoral processes and regulation have been robust and effective However if we do not ensure clear simple and up-to-date electoral and political finance laws vitally important processes will be weakened and less effective and public confidence will be reduced

Failure to act now poses a number of risks

bull Innovation and improvement will be stifled

Electoral law currently stipulates the use of particular forms deadlines and even specific accessibility devices used in polling stations If the law doesnrsquot change we risk holding back genuine innovation that could greatly improve the electoral experience for voters campaigners parties and candidates

bull Voters will be discouraged

Potential voters may find that important aspects of registering voting and campaign transparency are so old-fashioned or opaque that they donrsquot have enough trust in politicians or elections to cast their vote

bull Good candidates and competent elections agents will be discouraged

The longer that electoral law remains complex and unclear the more likely it is that able people will be reluctant to stand for election for fear of inadvertently breaking the law Conversely deliberate breaches may go undetected and encourage corruption in our elections

bull Governments will face disproportionate and unnecessary complexity

Simplified and modernised electoral law would serve as the foundation for any future reform If it is not changed now governments are likely to find it harder to deliver the policy changes that are most important to them and to voters

bull Relationships between laws for UK and devolved elections will become more complex

Electoral law reform should enable and support policy diversity between elections for different bodies within the UK However legislation dealing with the underlying technical or administrative detail should not need to vary dramatically between elections in different parts of the UK The aim should be to provide the strongest possible common foundation for delivering well run polls in different scenarios

Electoral Commission published sources

Digital campaigning Increasing transparency or voters 2018

Political finance regulation and digital campaigning A public perspective 2018

Challenging elections in the UK 2012

Winter tracker 2019

6