Iconic Films

2 for 1 tickets to Singin' In The Rain, this coming Monday. Book now

Navigation - link to other main sections from here

From The Times

April 29, 2008

Abolish postal voting on demand. Now

Our democracy is being undermined by widespread fraud. It's not too late to do something

Libby Purves

Almost nothing else matters. Not as urgently, anyway. Yesterday's exhaustive 100-page report from the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust ought to put every minister, editor, campaigner and citizen on red alert. For it is about democracy, and from democracy flows government, whose actions affect everything that keeps us safe: law, security, policing, prosperity, fair dealing, relations with the world. When rot affects the democratic process the ship of state has a hole in its hull. It is an emergency.

And rot there is: largely unheeded. As the report remarks with deadly blandness: “Outside of ministerial circles, there is a widespread view that a fundamental overhaul of UK electoral law, administration and policy is urgently required.” Just read those first four words again.

The report is called Purity of Elections in the UK: Causes for Concern. It traces how the mechanics of British elections have been neglected and then vacuously tampered with, until public confidence in the process is the lowest in Western Europe. Any day now they will send in UN observers to check us out. Possibly from Nicaragua or Nigeria. Or Florida.

The cause is partly systemic, with our failure to have fixed terms of office, which gives advantage to the incumbent, and our tolerance of heavy spending on marginal seats, which benefits the richest. But largely the crisis is the result of “reforms” swept in by new Labour without caution, reflection or wariness of human nature. Postal voting “on demand” was cavalierly introduced for the first elections of the millennium, though, as the report dryly observes, the claimed benefit of increased turnout and social inclusion has been greatly exaggerated. It also says that “the likelihood of fraud occurring could - and should - have been predicted on the basis of evidence of growing proxy vote fraud during the 1990s”. Had there been a snap election last year, the postal dispute and backlog would also have disenfranchised several million.

Postal voting has been a disaster. High-profile frauds have been prosecuted in Peterborough, Birmingham and Lancashire, but are probably the tip of an iceberg. Don't listen to me if you doubt it - listen to the judges who waded through the evidence. Richard Mawrey, QC, observed in the Aston and Bordersley Green frauds that the level of cheating “would disgrace a banana republic” and said that fraud will continue unabated and be “lethal to the democratic process”. Roll-stuffing - creating imaginary people by filling in the form that comes through the door - “is childishly simple to commit and very difficult to detect. To ignore the probability that it is widespread, particularly in local elections, is a policy that even an ostrich would despise”.

Officialdom, he says, shows “not simply complacency but denial”. Indeed: government spokesmen just say that “appropriate safeguards” are in place. They clearly aren't.

Postal voting fraud is even worse than roll-stuffing, because real people are denied their voice. Government says postal voting is “more convenient”. You betcha. It is convenient for patriarchs and “community leaders”, bullies who gather up the votes of weaker members of their group and deliver them to the desired candidate. The report carefully points out that cheating is not exclusive to any one party or social group, but admits that in the “biraderi” system among some British Asians the practice of mutual support creates a village politics culture: “Extended family and kinship networks are mobilised to secure the support of up to several hundred electors.”

It is obviously important not to demonise ethnic minorities; nor is this the only problem. Inaccuracies, inefficiencies, inequities are mercilessly skewered in the report. Nonetheless, it is a dismaying reflection that in modern Britain thousands of women, young people and new citizens can have their votes compelled as surely as if they were at gunpoint in Zimbabwe. Only 46 per cent of British Asians regard postal voting as safe. When there was a parallel concern in sectarian Northern Ireland, postal votes were limited to those who could prove genuine inability to get to a polling booth; moreover, to prevent roll-stuffing, each voter registers individually. With a photo and national insurance number. Not just on a list written by the family boss.

The voting booth was once a sacred spot. As Tony Benn always says, election day is a great day because only then is every one of us equal in power. The stub of pencil on a string, the mangy curtain, the tin box - these things spelt freedom of thought. You could vote or spoil your paper in privacy. It wasn't perfect - we know now what a mess the electoral registers are in. We also know the tricks and bribes that sway marginals; that's been going on for ever - think of 1966 when, with a majority of two, a desperate Harold Wilson sent Barbara Castle to Humberside to promise them a bridge. But it took the Blair Government's half-baked mania for innovation to offer postal votes on demand without a thought about the result.

The Universal Declaration on Human Rights stipulates “universal and equal suffrage, held by secret vote guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the elector”. The Rowntree report should be death to postal voting on demand. Now. Turnout might go down a bit, but turnout matters less than integrity. Those who do walk to the booth must know absolutely that, on this day, their vote counts no more and no less than anybody else's. Too late for Thursday: not too late for the 2009 election.

As with a number of actions by governments of all hues, it seems that the dangers of postal voting were not investigated in a sufficiently robust manner Either that, or they were, and those who made the final decision to go ahead ignored advice. Call me a cynical, but am I surprised! Not a bit!

Lewis Blight, Nottingham, UK

I've used postal voting for years. First when I was in the military, and later when I found myself in jobs that required a lot of travel, often at short notice.

So, for me, a postal vote is a necessity.

Chris Palmer, Southampton,

Are ostriches noted for their tolerance of voting fraud?

Tom Foster, London, UK

The state of Oregon has for 8 years used only mailed ballots, returned in double envelopes, either mailed back or dropped into ballot boxes at public buildings. This has not increased fraud but has raised the percentage of citizens voting.

Jane, Portland OR, USA

I don't think voting fraud would be possible here in Pembrokeshire, everyone on the county electorate map is accounted for, I use postal vote, have done so on two occasions. There is still apathy in voting, I only wish there were more 'liberals' and I don't mean democrats!

yvonne-Mandy Nicholl , Tenby, Pembrokeshire

Electoral reform is necessary and not just with reform of postal voting, but also who votes. Being someone with knowledge of how the immigration system works, Home Office staff have noted that many overstayers and illegal immigrants provide evidence of their eligibility to vote!

Cromwell, Liverpool,

I also agree with Tom and Anne: It's deliberate. There is no other possible reason for the present state of ministerial denial.
Still, it won't matter for much longer! Did YOU vote for Manuel Barroso? No? thought not me neither. But he's president of the EU of which we're all fully paid-up members.

Martin C, Twickenham, UK

LP ignores the fact that we always had PVs on demand. The rules are now slightly easier, but the applicant has to provide personal identifiers that can be checked against the actual postal vote. That's why the most recent case of electoral fraud (Slough, Tory) wasn't PVs but large scale personation.

Mike, Slough, UK

Being disabled i accepted postal voting as i wasn't going to give up my vote, but then Labour decided it would fiddle the system. My faith in it was destroyed so i cancelled postal voting and opted to struggle to the polling booth. What a disgrace this country is under Labour, time they were gone.

Samantha Jones, Bucks, England

No chance Libby.The present lot suppose it will advantage them, why do you think it was offered in the first place ?
You and I may care about the health of democracy.Labour cares about votes.

robert everitt, wolverhampton,

The biggest threat to the democratic system is party politics not postal voting.

Candidates selected by central office and following the whip are not representing the electorate, couple this with zero accountability and a few postal votes is immaterial.

Russ, Glasgow,

I think that postal voting should be abolished in its entirety. It used to be the case that you turned up with your card, or proof of identity, to vote. Why is that not acceptable today?

tone, Cambridge,

While we are at voting reform perhaps we should look again at first past the post and realise that voters in non-marginals make the perfectly rational decision that there is no point in voting in their constituency since the winner is already pre-ordained. That has got to be a factor in low-turn out

Tim Longman, Chester,

why has the article only one clear reference (in biraderi) to muslim immigrants? why must ms purves use innuendo to get published? standards of truth for muslims are different from those of other religions. everything they do is affected, from commercial practice to being on oath in court

stephen, london,

A very good article. However, it is not enough to concentrate on postal voting making fraud easier. Postal vote on demand IS WRONG IN ITSELF. Even without frauds,it amounts to abolishing the guarantee of a secret ballot, one of the six demands of the 1840s Chartists, granted in the 1872 Ballot Act.

R A Zambardino, Stafford, U.K.

Asians, how about the Jews in Tower Hamlets? The deafening silence of a PC taboo.

David, Manchester, UK

ZanuLabour benefits from postal voting so the decree to allow it stands

John, Peterborough, UK

Postal votining effectively disenfranchies thousands of women from ethnic minorities. And that's from a Labour government!

Peter Sammons, Cambridge, UK

Week in, week out Libby Purves writes calm, rational, unhysterical common sense, getting to the nub of so many crucial issues without making her columns a sop to her own ego. Libby is it not time you stood for political office? You would have my vote.

Lyn, Birmingham,

...and whilst we're on the subject of voting at elections, the closed list is another abomination which forces the electorate to vote by party instead of by individual. Another attack on true democracy leaving me with no choice but a spoiled ballot paper at each of the last EU polls

stephen grant, cheltenham, UK

Be realistic! How do you expect NuLab to change this when it surely works in their favour. Would you change if it was giving you all the power? It may be looked into after the elections and only if NuLab is doing badly, otherwise, the system is here to stay so live with it.

yt, London, UK

Fred of Horsham is of course abolutely right. New Labour has stuffed the country with immigrants knowing full well that they will of course vote for their benefactors - New Labour. The icing on the cake for New Labour is that so many are adept and willing to perpetrate fraudulent postal voting.

Callan, Liverpool, England

This is why the LabLibCon establishment suck up so much to Muslim communities. "Elders" instruct heads of households (i.e. fathers) who to vote for, who then pass on the same message to their wives and voting-age children. Result? Votes by the shovel-full.

Myles, Glasgow,

I absolutely agree. Low turnout is not the problem, only a symptom of an unfair electoral system and too much money in politics. "Increasing turnout" is just bandaid over the cancer.

Arie Kruiniger, Bristol,

Why oh why do people look at the syptoms rather than the underlying and unseen cause?It was brought in by a corrupt goverment and a parliament that has submitetd itself to the dictates of a 'bastard' and corrupt dictatorial European (so called) union.

G Blezard, london, uk

For those of us who do jobs where we can be sent away at a day's notice postal voting is essential yet I doubt I could prove that I had to have it. I admit to being surprised how easy it was to get but then registering to vote at all is equally simple and unchecked.

Alice, Cambridge,

We need to spend the money that it takes to have honest elections with the secrecy of the ballot box guaranteed for all. That means letting people vote in any polling station in the country, and "polling stations on wheels" visiting those who are genuinely unable to visit any polling station.

Mike Scott, London,

Simple. Anybody adopting the corrupt voting practices of their original countries of domicile should, on being found guilty, be returned there forthwith.

Will, London, England

Yep - a good article, and I agree with it.

Annie Hancock, Bath, UK

I have a polling card for my 19 year old son who is away at the moment. I am quite sure that, if I were dishonest, I could find a male of roughly the same age who did not have the right to vote and sell it to him, if he had the desire to have his say. Alternatively my 16 year old son could use it.

Victoria, London, England

I really enjoy using the postal vote. It is convenient, efficient and I feel it should be kept.

Pay more attention on how to make it more honest and safe.

Jeremy, London, UK

"from democracy flows government"
Do you use the same dictionary as the rest of us? Democracy is about choice and government is about control.
If you want democracy, write a constitution that starts by telling politicians and bureaucrats what they can't do, preferably on pain of jail or death.

KR, Stockport,

Trade unions couldn't bully members when voting became private. The same principles apply in general elections. Fairness is ensured with secure privacy.

John, Peterborough, UK

A greater fraud on democracy is the current bias towards one party by ignoring out-of-date constituency boundaries which do not reflect population flow.

John, Peterborough, UK

Postal voting has been a disaster. Agreed.

May be this why no one seems to want ID cards; they would make it more difficult to obtain a postal voting form.

But why was it brought it in. Nulab presumably thought that THEY would benefit more than the opposition.

It certainly was not altruistic

M. Cawdery, Portadown, Co. UK, EU.

No, Smith of Kent:
Purvis does not condemn any postal voters: she condemns the Labour government and its bone-headed and/or meretricious policies. And as usual she is right.

Rosemary, Germany,

Good article. A judge declared that electoral fraud in Birmingham would shame a Banana republic - the government blatantly refused to take any decisive action then.

This is because a corrupt government will do absolutely anything to remain in power as we now see in Zimbabwe.

We deserve better

Jason Mead, Bristol, England

I firmly believe this is not incompetence on the part of the government; I believe they have deliberately debased our voting system to make it easier for fraud to occur. We probably shouldn't expect any better from politicians, but what has happened to the electoral commission?

Sebastian, Bedford, UK

Well at least making it harder to get on the register should improve the turnout percentages

Andy Rooney, London,

I would have thought the Iraqis would be the best choice to run our elections. They have the experience, they need the money and they are not likely to be intimidated. Meanwhile, we could get the French to run our railways and the Germans to to run our schools. Airports - any suggestions?

Frank Upton, Solihull,

We vote on Thursdays so that the count is on Friday and the victors can be ready to take up their posts on Monday having had a weekend to collect their thoughts. Smart or what?

Michael, Northampton, UK

Why would an unelected leader show any concern at all for the small matter of a dodgy electoral system?
Equally, on what grounds is that same leader able to criticise Mugabe?

m collins, Leeds,

Is stealing a few votes any worse than reneging on practically every election promise made over the last 10+ years ? Live by the fraud ... you die by the fraud .

Benzo , Nr Chelmsford,

Words cannot express how angry this makes me and what is worse is the response from government ministers that appropriate safeguards are in place. Presumably this is because Labour are the main beneficiaries of this type of fraud so it is not in their interests to do anything about it?

Patrick, Cambridge,

"It is obviously important not to demonise ethnic minorities" Why not? If it was English voters doing this Ms Purves would not fail to condemn us. When this country imports hundreds of thousands of the Third World it also imports all the habits that have kept them as "Third World".

Fred, Horsham,

I have my suspicions about the motives of the Blair govenment on this issue too. I strongly believe that only those who can prove they need a postal vote should get one. For the rest, if they cannot be bothered to walk to the polling station, why should their opinion be heard?

Mike, Hertfordshire, England

By the way, can anyone tell me why we always vote on Thursdays?

Mike, Hertfordshire, England

Is it at all plausible that this was deliberate?

Tim Whitworth, Basingstoke, Britain

"It is obviously important not to demonise ethnic minorities" - why not if they are chiefly responsible for the abuses?

Roger Angove, Penzance,

What a devastatingly casual phrase in Smith of Kent's comment:: "Dangerous areas". What a horrifying indication of the depths this once secure society has sunk to.

MikeMSN, Midsomer Norton, UK

Sighhhhhh!!.............Whoever you vote for, the Government gets in!
Yuk, yuk, yuk!
You could not get a fag paper twixt the lot of them and their policies!
What we need now is persons of proven capability to run this country!
The problem is, who would want to, only megalomaniacs!

GERONIMO, LONDON, MIDDLESEX

Purves wrongly condemns all postal voters because of the corruption of a few. Postal voting is essential when local government places voting venues miles from residents' homes or in dangerous areas. The elderly cannot walk long distances. Original registration should be in person w/photo ID.

Smith, Kent,

Could we not vote near our workplace ,electronically, than be stuck to polling booths at home? So many of us work, and could be away from home on poling day that postal votes are the easiest option. If only we could vote at lunchtime near our workplaces, then perhaps more people would vote.

Pete B, London, UK

Thanks, Ms Purves: over 40 years I think I have missed 3 votes, none postal, often fitting them round awkward work /travel commitments.
The idea that a crooked postal vote can cancel my honest one fills me with rage, ethnic minorities or not.
PREVENTION, not prosecution, should uphold our RIGHTS.

MikeM, St. Albans, England

I'd be in favour of that as long as we replace one-day Thursday elections with two days over the weekend

Mike Homfray, Liverpool,

I disagree Blair's government did this without a thought about the result. I think they knew quite clearly that postal voting on demand would be open to fraud and that it would benefit them. They were/are happy to govern with 36% of the vote. They are not interested in the views of the people.

Tom Moncrieff, London, England

I couldn't agree more.

Anne Murphy, London, UK

Also in Libby Purves

Also in Columnists

Times Recommends

OUR COLUMNISTS

Libby Purves

Libby Purves worked for some years for BBC Radio 4, as a reporter and a presenter on the Today programme and, since 1983, has presented Midweek. She joined The Times as a columnist in 1990. She received an OBE in 1999 for her services to journalism and was Columnist of the Year in the same year. In her spare time she writes bestselling novels. Her opinion column appears in the The Times on Tuesdays