Agenda item

6.1  Adrian Green, Regional Manager from the Electoral Commission, addressed the committee and outlined the role and responsibilities of the commission and of returning officers.

6.2  Members commented on the initial response of Southwark’s returning officer to the proposed scrutiny review and asked whether there were any examples of returning officers being appointed from other local authorities in order to avoid conflict.  Members also asked whether the electoral commission considered self assessment to be an adequate way of measuring performance.  Adrian Green responded that returning officers had appeared in front of scrutiny committees and that the commission’s upcoming report would make reference to the valuable role of scrutiny.  Bristol had recently engaged an independent consultant to undertake a review and report to an overview and scrutiny committee.  He was of the view that self assessment was probably not adequate but that introducing anything more, in order to achieve a more independent and rigorous process, would require additional resources.

6.3  In response to further questions, Adrian Green expressed the view that as returning officers delivered elections on behalf of the council it was appropriate for them to be accountable to the council.  Members emphasised that the counting of votes in both the elections had been lengthy and wondered if the electoral commission had any role in improving procedures.  Adrian Green stated that a lot of problems could be traced back to the availability of resources and to planning and managing procedures.  Possibly the council had more of a role in respect of local elections as it had a duty to provide resources.  It was a matter of choice for returning officers as to whether or not to change procedures and not something on which the electoral commission could give direction.

6.4  Members noted that the council’s head of electoral services was conducting a review of the combined general and local elections on 6 May 2010 and asked the electoral commission’s representative if the commission would be interested in seeing the results of this review.  Adrian Green replied that the commission would welcome sight of the report and that the committee could receive the performance standards report in relation to Southwark and a copy of Southwark’s self-evaluation.

6.5  Members asked whether the commission set out any standards as to the number of staff per voting station and the number of counters.  Adrian Green indicated that guidance was published as to polling stations in respect of a single parliamentary election but not in respect of combined elections.  No guidance was issued in respect of the numbers of counters and there was a variation across local authorities.

6.6  The chair indicated that for the next meeting of the committee she would ask the returning officer to present the results of the local review.  Members agreed that it would be a positive move to re-invite the returning officer to participate in the scrutiny review and to consider the local review together with the self-evaluation and the electoral commission’s monitoring report.  Any comments from the electoral commission on the local review could be considered at the same meeting.

6.7  Members noted the reference in the returning officer’s email of 24 June 2010 to a session explaining the UK electoral system to Kosovo officials and asked whether it would be possible for a copy of any presentation to be circulated.  Members also noted the list of declaration times for the general election and asked whether it would be possible to contact Wandsworth (for Putney, Battersea and Tooting) and Hackney (Hackney North and Stoke Newington and Hackney South and Shoreditch) asking how much each borough spent on the election process, how many counters were employed and the number of staff at each polling station.  As a comparison, Southwark’s returning officer could be asked whether she considered the resources allocated to her were sufficient or if she needed additional resources.

6.8  Members also suggested that the returning officer be asked about how practical changes could be made to allow people standing in queues at closing time to cast their votes and whether any alternative premises could be found for the count.