The mysterious 66 votes in Wolverhampton South West

According to the official election results, Wolverhampton South West saw more votes cast than there had been ballot papers issued.

Wolverhampton signAt the count there were 40,160 votes totalled up in the general election in May. However, the official records show that only 40,094 ballot papers should have been in the count, 66 less than the number of votes counted. This is not a simple matter of a typo in the official records, because Wolverhampton Council has confirmed that these two figures are the ones official staff calculated at the count.

As to why the Returning Officer declared a result that was clearly wrong, that’s all rather a mystery. Both the council and the Electoral Commission tell me they are investigating further. It’s fair enough that the Commission is only looking at the case now as it isn’t its job to audit election results immediately after declaration. But quite when the Returning Officer or their staff first noticed a problem and what they then is a very pertinent question.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in Election law.
Advert

10 Comments

  • Walter West 25th Aug '10 - 1:02pm

    This is very, very concerning.

    It will be very interesting to follow this – I just hope, with all due respect to Lib-Dem Voice, that one or more of our national media outlets choose to cover this.

  • Paul McKeown 25th Aug '10 - 1:35pm

    banana republic

  • 66? 229? Pah! Waltham Forest managed to count an extra 3000 Labour votes than were actually cast in High Street ward.

  • At the Crewe & Nantwich count we (the agents) were blithely told that “there are 50 to 60 votes missing, but they won’t make any difference to the result”.

    It took an FoI request to establish the actual figure was 60, so why we were given this vague “50 to 60” remains one of life’s mysteries!

  • Interesting, Benjamin.Is that an absolute figure, or a rounded guesstimate? Is anyone looking into that? How was it done, exactly?

  • Why are the national newspapers and television media not jumping up and down in concern about this? Without a scrupulously honest election process, we would become a country where votes are bought. The Returning Officer should not have declared the result and there should have been an immediate investigation.

    This is a far more serious issue than being a few votes out in the counting. It is the first step on the road to money buying power and influence and symbolic of how the principle of all citizens being equal could be undermined.

  • And then it could always have been just a clerical error!
    No conspiracy after all.

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.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

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

Advert

Recent Comments

  • David Allen
    The deafening silence about who might be a good new LD leader tells its own story. A leadership change is a big opportunity for a party to reposition itself an...
  • Neil Hickman
    For good reason, Town Council byelections normally aren't included. But I think the result in Uckfield West is worth noting. Straight fight between the Lib Dem...
  • Peter Martin
    LibDems aren't invisible. If you were, you wouldn't have 72MPs and thousands of councillors. You don't have more because yourselves and the Labour Party aren't ...
  • Kevin Hawkins
    Here is my usual monthly summary of the last fifty local by-elections. Percentage Vote Share: Reform 24.46%, Labour 18.81%, Conservatives 17.13%, Liberal ...
  • David Raw
    In Sheffield Southey (Brightside constituency) the Lib Dem vote has dropped by half to a mere 2.2% and fifth place. Is it not a cause for concern that in 20...