Review of Bristol elections calls for widespread changes

Confidence in the administration of elections by Bristol Council was badly shaken this May after a series of problems, including ballot papers found in the wrong place, election results taking 6 hours longer than expected to be declared and numerous phone calls going unanswered. A detailed review of electoral administration was subsequently ordered and it has called for major changes.

The Bristol Evening Post reported,

Apart from more than half of the election phone queries going unanswered, the office for the council’s electoral services department in the Corn Exchange has been described as “woefully inadequate”. One of Ms Dixon’s many recommendations to the council is to find alternative accommodation.

Then we come to the poll cards, a total of 500,000 of which were distributed to households for the general and local elections.

It is not essential to take your polling card with you when you vote although it does help. Nonetheless, Ms Dixon discovered that 1,373 poll cards in the Bristol West constituency were not printed. This was due to human error when a sequence number was incorrectly entered on a print run.

On postal voting, a number of problems occurred. On April 23, 2,381 Bristol East postal ballot papers were sent to voters in Bristol West by mistake. This led to checks which discovered that parliamentary postal ballot papers had also been issued incorrectly in Knowle ward because Bristol East papers had been wrongly packed for Bristol South.

The reason for this glitch was apparently due to a software problem. A constituency boundary change which had been correctly entered into the software did not follow through to the printing of the ballot papers. Another of Ms Dixon’s recommendations is an updating of the software programme…

When the postal votes were opened and checked, the problems really began to take off, thanks to postal votes being put into the wrong ballot boxes. This led to discrepancies in ballot paper totals and votes being “lost” and then “found”.

Among the blunders were:

● 165 Bishopston postal votes placed in a Bishopsworth ballot box.

● 225 Postal votes in Brislington East were mixed up with a ballot box for Brislington West.

● postal votes in Bristol North West were incorrectly put into a ballot box for Henleaze.

● the discovery of 685 ballot papers for Bishopsworth in the Bedminster box.

Ms Dixon said there was “a strong perception of lack of transparency in the process of moving ballot papers through the process”.

“Although verbal briefings took place, it seemed that many candidates and agents had little or no information as to why packets of votes were arriving and being added in at a late stage,” said Ms Dixon.

“This lack of transparency and communication led to descriptions of votes being ‘lost’ and then ‘found’, which although incorrect, gained currency as a description of events.”

During the parliamentary counts, the main bone of contention was the length of time taken before results were declared. People complained as count staff were “sitting doing nothing” leading to the conclusion that management was poor and that resources were not being fully utilised to enable speedy progress.

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in Election law.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/20689 for Twitter and emails.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?




Recent Comments

  • User Avatarmalc 24th Apr - 1:18am
    Mathew Hunchbach " It is not possible to support some item of government expenditure without also supporting some balancing way of paying for it." I...
  • User AvatarDavid-1 24th Apr - 12:46am
    @Matthew Huntbach: "The idea that a junior coalition partner very much smaller than the senior one can dominate the agenda of the coalition is nonsense,...
  • User AvatarCarlQ 24th Apr - 12:04am
    I think some people may have missed the point where Austin said he was happy for feedback. Repeating the same points again in a slightly...
  • User AvatarPsi 23rd Apr - 11:54pm
    Jayne Mansfield “One of the arguments most often put forward by people who I overhear saying they intend to vote UKIP is the anger that...
  • User AvatarPhyllis 23rd Apr - 11:42pm
    Matthew H "Would the people of this country have cheered on the LibDems for keeping their pledge on tuition fees? " The people of this...
  • User AvatarPhyllis 23rd Apr - 11:39pm
    Matthew Huntbach - the point is that political parties MUST look after their OWN supporters first and foremost. That is why the Tories are keeping...