We just saw a significant victory when it comes to ensuring the independence of our elections watchdog.

It came during the second reading of the Representation of the People Bill on Monday, which is the government’s legislation to reform elections with measures such as votes at 16, automating voter registration and tightening rules around political donations.  During the debate, Steve Reed, the Communities Secretary, announced that the government will remove the government’s ability to set the strategic direction of the Electoral Commission.

Announcing the move in Parliament, he said: “We recognise the importance of maintaining confidence in the commission’s operational independence and ensuring it can carry out its statutory duties effectively, so we will repeal in full the power for government to impose a strategy and policy statement on the Electoral Commission.”

Weakening independence risks undermining public trust

This is an important win for democracy campaigners, as it undoes the damaging move by the last government to bring the Electoral Commission under the direction of ministers. The Electoral Commission is effectively the referee that ensures our elections are run properly and that political parties adhere to electoral law. Any move to weaken its independence risks undermining public trust in how our democracy is run and also risks opening the door to potential political interference in the future.

This week’s announcement promises to reverse the last government’s policy, introduced in the Elections Act 2022, which required the Electoral Commission to ‘have regard to’ a strategy and policy statement set by ministers, which reflects the government’s policy priorities and set out the ‘roles and responsibilities’ of the commission in achieving those priorities. The commission also had to report annually against that statement to the Speaker’s Committee. We argued these stipulations amounted to a significant imposition on the commission’s regulatory autonomy.

This week, a new report from Spotlight on Corruption highlighted the impact of Electoral Commission independence to the UK’s democratic standing. The report lays bare just how far the UK has slipped since ministers were given powers over the Commission in the 2022 Elections Act.

What changed in 2022

The 2022 Elections Act, introduced by the previous government, requires the regulator to ‘have regard to’ a strategy a policy statement set by ministers which reflects the government’s policy priorities and set out the ‘roles and responsibilities’ of the Commission in achieving those priorities. In plain terms: the body that polices fair play in elections must now consider the priorities of the politicians it oversees.

We raised our concerns during the passage of the bill highlighting how vital Commission independence is to electoral integrity and raising concerns about this change being introduced with no wider consultation or scrutiny. The Electoral Commission themselves were highly critical of the change saying the introduction of the policy statement, “is inconsistent with the role that an independent electoral commission plays in a healthy democratic system”.

We also raised concerns that the parliamentary committee charged with oversight of the EC had, at that time, a government majority. We recommended inviting ordinary members of the public to join the Speaker’s Committee, much like the Standards Committee has done, and ensuring that there could not be a governing party majority.

Why independence matters

Oversight of the Electoral Commission should be non-partisan and it is particularly important that the Electoral Commission, charged with ensuring fair play in politics, should be rigorously independent and able to command confidence in its impartiality. If the referee can be leaned on by one team, trust in the game evaporates.

Electoral management body independence is set out under international law and in a range of international guidelines and, unsurprisingly, the change brought in under the 2022 Act was criticised by two different international electoral observer missions during the 2024 General Elections. This new report highlights how since the Act, the UK has dropped down international ratings, finding that the UK fell from 30^th to 52^nd for electoral body autonomy.

A missed opportunity

The current government’s strategy statement on forthcoming electoral changes does not commit to restoring the Commission’s independence by removing the strategy and policy statement. This is a missed opportunity.

We cannot allow independence to be chipped away. The Commission must be accountable to Parliament as a whole — not the government of the day.

Join the Electoral Reform Society today

Last month we hosted an APPG for Electoral Reform event at Portcullis House, The future of the electoral system – in conversation with John Pullinger CB, Chair of the Electoral Commission. We were delighted to have John Pullinger there to share his perspective and expertise as the Chair of the Electoral Commission with MPs, peers and their staff. The Electoral Commission is an independent body which oversees our elections and political finance regulations in the UK and work to promote public confidence in our democratic processes and ensure its integrity.

The meeting focused on looking forward to the elections taking place this year and considered the challenges and opportunities for the electoral system.

John Pullinger began the meeting highlighting how the landscape of our elections in 2024 is very different to the last general election landscape in 2019 and it is vital that we sustain confidence in the electoral system in this new era. When noting the differences in the landscape of the UK post-2019 he highlighted the new challenges faced since the last general election including Brexit, COVID-19, cost-of-living crisis, various international crises and the Electoral Act. He also noted the divergence of the electoral agenda across the different nations of the UK raising a constitutional point over the difference of prioritises. Finally, he looked forward to the new risks to the electoral system and democratic process which were on the periphery in 2019 which are now becoming more central and will continue to do so in the coming years, meaning we need to safeguard our democracy now.

John outlined 5 ways in which politicians and civil society can bolster the strength and defence of our democratic system.

Put the Voter 1^st

Putting the voter first is an effort to bolster confidence in the electoral system. In order to put the voter first, it is imperative that we do the utmost to engage all people in the democratic process. This means making sure that every person who has the right in to vote in the UK can do so, including:

1. increasing efforts to inform people about Voter ID requirements,
2. making sure those not in possession of valid ID are able to access and register for a Voter Authority Certificate,
3. engaging with the newly enfranchised in the oversea electorate,
4. working on overcoming obstacles in the implementation of Voter ID such as increasing funding for Councils so they can provide proper spaces for those with disabilities or other requirements to vote securely,
5. increasing the number of voters on the electoral register to ensure that the most people possible are able to engage in the electoral process.

Support campaigning

Recently there has been an upsurge in abuse, intimidation, threats and violence toward both political and non-party campaigners. Our democracy relies on the continued work of these individuals to uphold its legitimacy as a system which represents its people. If people are put off standing for office / engaging in the campaigns / getting involved in politics due to worries over their safety, both physical and mental, our democratic system is not fit for purpose.

An extension to this is shoring up support for increasing transparency around political party finances; donations from companies and donations from unincorporated associations are cause for concern.

Engage with electoral administrators

Electoral administrators are facing increasing pressures including the logistical and cost implications of implementing the new Voter ID requirements.  It is not enough to have resilient administrators; we need give them the tools to be able to ensure our electoral system thrives and make sure that this experience is consistent across the country.

Simplify and consolidate Electoral Law

Currently Electoral Law is dispersed across various pieces of legislation meaning it is a piecemeal and difficult to navigate. We need to consolidate electoral law, especially with the introduction of another piece of legislation, the Elections Act 2022. Consolidating Law will allow the understanding and application to be simplified.

Recognising the world we now live in

Any reforms to the electoral system need to be couched in the world we live in now and be futureproofed for the next election cycle in 2029/2030, the reforms need to retain and entrench confidence in the electoral system. This means a move towards modernising of the electoral system including more digital approaches such as Automatic Voter Registration.

ERS Members helped make this event happen

The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Electoral Reform (APPGER) is supported by the Electoral Reform Society and Make Votes Matter. You can help meetings like this happen by becoming a member of the ERS today.

Join the ERS today

In a recent, wide-ranging, interview with the Financial Times, John Pullinger, the chair of the Electoral Commission, expressed concerns about the government’s voter ID scheme and the threat to the Commission’s independence contained in the Elections Act, along with political finance loopholes.

Echoing many of the points we have made, Pullinger highlighted that the voter ID rules disproportionately affect some groups of people, making it easier for some people to vote than others.

Over 14,000 people were turned away due to voter ID

The Electoral Commission’s figures show that at least 14,000 people were prevented from casting their vote at last year’s local elections due to a lack of required ID. “The proportion was significantly higher among disabled people, unemployed people and some other groups,” said Pullinger.

There is now a very real risk we could see a far greater number turned away at the General Election, where those who are traditionally less engaged come out to vote. The Government should at the very least expand the types of ID permitted ahead of the next election.

This is a point that Pullinger agreed with, suggesting the government widen the list of accepted forms of ID.  During the passage of the bill we highlighted all the opportunities the government had to make the Bill less damaging. Pullinger highlighted attempts to broaden the list and how the government rejected them “I think readers will need to draw their own judgment about that” he told the Financial Times.

Widening the list would be an easy way to reduce the number of people rejected. But, ultimately, we would urge them to scrap this unnecessary and disproportionate policy altogether. Otherwise, we could see thousands of people turned away from casting their vote in a General Election, which would risk causing serious damage to trust in our democratic process.

Ministers setting the Electoral Commission’s strategy

The same legislation that brought in voter ID also ended the Electoral Commission’s strategy and policy independence. Ministers now write a strategy and policy statement on what they believe the commission’s priorities should be.

A strategy written by ministers of one party, voted through parliament by MPs of that party, does not seem like a strong basis for independence.

“We think this is a bad provision and should be repealed” Pullinger said, before making the clear assertion that “A statement of guidance is incompatible with the idea of an independent body”.

Campaign finance reform ignored

It’s not just the laws that have been passed that concerned the Electoral Commission, it’s the ones that haven’t been even looked at. We have long suffered from campaign finance regulations with glaring loopholes.

The fact that political parties aren’t subject to the same anti-money laundering regulations as businesses was described in the interview as a “troubling anomaly”, while the fact that companies registered in the UK can donate more than they make in the UK was also criticised.

Whilst making it harder to vote and reducing the independence of the Electoral Commission, the government is also ignoring the ways that dodgy money can flow into the whole system. This is an approach that is entirely head over tail – we should be building barriers to suspicious money, not the ballot box.

Add your name to our call to scrap the government’s voter ID scheme

Add your name today

This week three separate independent reports have exposed the extent of the unnecessary damage voter ID has wrought to our democracy. Voter ID was rushed through for the local elections in May which meant voters needed to produce a government-approved form of identification before they voted.

An interim report by the Electoral Commission published earlier this year showed that at least 14,000 people were prevented from casting their vote, after being turned away from polling stations and not returning. Further reports this week by the Electoral Commission, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Democracy and the Constitution, and the Local Government Information Unit, have now shed further light on how this policy has affected voters.

“some people found it harder than others to show accepted voter ID, including disabled people and the unemployed”

The Electoral Commission: Report on the May 2023 local elections in England

The Electoral Commission released its full report on voter ID at the local elections and found that it had a disproportionate effect on disabled and unemployed voters, who were more likely not to vote due to not having ID. It also found a greater proportion of 18-25-year-olds as well as people from ethnic minority backgrounds said they had turned up to polls without ID.

The report called for a number of changes to the ID rules including reviewing the types of acceptable ID, allowing for vouching (where one voter attests for another), giving people without an accepted form of ID more time to apply for a Voter Authority Certificate, and to improve the data collected on who is affected by voter ID. The report concluded: “It is crucial that improvements are made at the earliest opportunity, particularly given there are important elections that are due to be held during the next 18 months, to improve accessibility and support those people who do not have an accepted form of ID”.

The current voter-ID system is, as it stands, a “poisoned cure” in that it disenfranchises more electors than it protects

The APPG on Democracy and the Constitution: Voter ID – What went wrong and how to fix it

This report found that voter ID had had a disproportionate impact on different people and warned that the “inherent ambiguity in the regime creates a real risk of injustice and potential discrimination.” The report highlighted the case of an immunocompromised woman who was turned away from a polling station after she refused to remove her mask to be identified. The report added: “The current voter-ID system is, as it stands, a ‘poisoned cure’ in that it disenfranchises more electors than it protects.”

Administrators were unconvinced that the introduction of voter ID has reduced public concerns about fraud

Local Government Information Unit: The Impact of Voter ID: The Views of Administrators

The Unit warned in its report that it “is still not clear that voter ID brings any benefits to the process” of elections and that electoral works did not see personation fraud “as a major issue” prior to the 2023 elections. However, it warned that voter ID had put additional pressures on electoral and polling station staff and warned that action is needed to “stop these invisible pressures from developing into unignorable election failures.”

Three reports, three different areas of failure for voter ID

These three reports lay bare in stark fashion how voter ID has made it disproportionately harder for different groups of voters to exercise their basic democratic right and also threatens to cause problems in the coming general election. We should be looking to strengthen our democracy by increasing turnout and increasing access to voting, not throwing unnecessary barriers in front of people.

With just one conviction and one caution for personation fraud recorded at the 2019 election, voter ID was always a solution in search of a problem. Yet now we can see it has caused problems with our elections that were not there before.

It’s clear that the Government needs to scrap this unnecessary and damaging policy before the next general election, or at the very least make sweeping changes to prevent it from causing major disruption.

Do you think we should risk voter ID in the general election? Add Your Name >

Shadowy dining clubs and millions of pounds in donations. This is the realm of ‘unincorporated associations’ one of the least-regulated areas of political finance in the UK.

Last week, Politico reported that these little-known entities have donated more than £14 million to British political parties over the past five years. While political parties in the UK are required to be transparent about their fundraising activities, unincorporated associations have far fewer restrictions. Funding from them must be declared, but how they got the money in the first place can be shrouded in secrecy.

This lack of transparency means they could potentially be exploited to funnel foreign money into British politics, evading regulatory scrutiny.

What is an unincorporated association?

Unincorporated associations are intended as a means to establish small non-profit organizations without the complexities of formal registration as a company or charity. Imagine an amateur sports team who wants to accept sponsorship or a choir that needs to hire a rehearsal space.

As small non-profits, they are not obligated to submit annual financial statements, open business bank accounts, or register a formal name.

While it is a good structure for groups of enthusiastic volunteers, when they get involved in politics the funding regulations for unincorporated associations are worryingly scant.

Declaring (some) donations

In Great Britain, an individual needs to be on the electoral register to make a donation to a political party. Likewise, for a company to make a donation they need to also be UK registered. But whilst UAs are on the list of permissible donors, those that give money to them do not need to be permissible donors.

If an association donates under £25,000 a year, no questions are asked. Once it hits that threshold, it is required to tell the Electoral Commission about any gifts of more than £7,500 it received from a single source in a 12-month period.

But this can in turn be avoided as Unincorporated Associations only have to count donations of £500 or more toward this £7,500 threshold.

Moreover, whilst a UA must disclose what donor information they have for gifts above the thresholds, they are still permitted to donate them.

It’s clear why the Committee on Standards in Public Life has highlighted unincorporated associations as a potential route for foreign money to influence UK elections and recommended tightening regulations.

More an open door than a loophole

As Politico reported, “Despite tens of millions of pounds being donated through UAs in the last decade, the Electoral Commission’s register shows that only a single group has ever reported hitting the £7,500 threshold, requiring more disclosure.”

To restore public trust in politics we need to reform these murky arrangements. At a time when concerns about who is attempting to influence our politics grow, that such a gaping hole remains in our rules on political donations is deeply worrying.

Join the ERS today

The Electoral Commission has written an unprecedented letter to the government, calling for them to reconsider provisions in the Elections Bill that would undermine the Commission’s role of oversight of our elections.

The Commission’s letter, addressed to Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, Michael Gove and his fellow ministers at the Department, states that,

“the introduction of a Strategy and Policy Statement – enabling the Government to guide the work of the Commission – is inconsistent with the role that an independent electoral commission plays in a healthy democratic system. If made law, these provisions will enable a government in the future to influence the Commission’s operational functions and decision-making, which risks undermining confidence in the independence and impartiality of the Commission”.

As well as the changes to the Electoral Commission, the Bill includes clauses introducing voter ID and imposing the use of the outdated First Past the Post voting system on Mayors and Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs). It also changes the rules around how charities can campaign for change and on the rights of foreign-born residents of the UK to vote.

We have been working with a group of campaigners as the Democracy Defence Coalition, to coordinate opposition to parts of the bill that will downgrade our democracy. The coalition declared the Commission’s letter ‘a momentous intervention that shows what is at stake’. Democracy Defence Coalition spokesperson Mark Kieran continued,

“We welcome this extraordinary intervention by the Electoral Commission. This is a moment that shows what is at stake for our democracy if this appalling anti-democratic Bill is allowed to become law. We urge peers to follow the Commission’s lead on Wednesday, stand up for our democracy and send this Bill to the scrapheap where it belongs”.

The Electoral Commission’s Full Letter

Join the Elections Bill Rally in Parliament Square.

The passing of the government’s Election Bill through the House of Commons last week was a huge blow to democracy.

It now heads to the Lords, with peers now leading the legislative fight to stop some of the worst elements of the bill making it onto the statute books.

Make no mistake, if the Elections Bill passes into law, it will fundamentally destabilise our democracy and rig the system in the favour of the Government of the day.

From the bill’s plans for mandatory photo ID at polling stations which will make it harder for millions of people to vote, to the undemocratic imposition of First Past the Post for elections for Mayors Police and Crime Commissioners – this bill would undermine our democracy and take power out of the hands of voters and give it instead to ministers and politicians.

We can’t let this happen.

That’s why democracy campaigners are speaking up.

On Saturday 5 February Make Votes Matter and other democracy sector organisations are staging a rally against the Elections Bill – speaking up to defend our democracy.

Speakers include:

• Former Labour Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell MP
• Lib Dem Education Spokesperson Munira Wilson MP
• Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office Fleur Anderson MP
• Director of Unlock Democracy Tom Brake
• Green Party London Assembly Member Zack Polanski AM
• Best for Britain CEO Naomi Smith and more…

Why not head to Parliament Square yourself and show them and this cause some support? It’s time to make your voice heard.

RSVP for the London rally in Parliament Square

Yesterday was a dark day for democracy. Despite widespread opposition from campaigners, election experts, academics and civil society the government’s Elections Bill successfully passed through the commons.

The Bill includes clauses introducing voter ID, more widespread use of the outdated First Past the Post voting system, and gives the Government more say in how the Electoral Commission – the body charged with ensuring elections are fair and free – is run. It also changes the rules around how charities can campaign for change and on the rights of foreign-born residents of the UK to vote.

Ministers have pushed ahead with the plans despite widespread backlash on the impact the proposals will have on democratic rights. 

Voter ID could deny hundreds of thousands of people their right to vote. The changes to the Electoral Commission belie a government trying to mark its own homework and interfere with the free and fair nature of a proper election. And extending first-past-the-post will ensure elected officials are less accountable to their community and electorate. And that’s before you get on to all the other problems in the Bill.

Opposition to the plans has been widespread – the cross-party Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs (PACAC) just last month called on the government to think again, saying that the evidence provided to support the bill was simply not good enough.

Despite this, just two Conservative MPs, PACAC Chair William Wragg and backbencher David Davis rebelled on the Voter ID provisions of the bill with Wragg choosing to abstain on the final vote.

This bill represents an all-out assault on our electoral law, a power grab by the government that will put too much power in the hands of the government of the day at the expense of ordinary voters who will find it harder to cast their vote.

Conservative support for the bill comes just weeks after 99 Conservative MPs voted against measures that would make people show a Covid pass before entering a nightclub.

Those rebels did so in the name of freedom – rejecting a policy they claimed would lead to the UK becoming a ‘show your papers’ society. The Prime Minister himself, in 2004, said “If I am ever asked to produce my ID card as evidence to say I am who I am… I will take that card and physically eat it.”

Yet those same MPs last night backed this bill that will see voters asked ‘papers please’ before they exercise their most fundamental democratic right. 

We have been campaigning hard against this bill and raising the risks of voter ID since 2017, and, over the past few months working as part of the Democracy Defence Coalition we’ve helped mobilise thousands of people against the plans – bringing together campaigners, charities, academics and civil society groups in opposition to this damaging bill. The public see through the government’s plans and thousands of you have signed petitions to stop the bill. But our work doesn’t end here.

The legislation now moves to the House of Lords and we’ll be working with peers to amend the legislation and remove its most contentious clauses or vote it down.

It now falls on peers to stop this attack on our democracy and we hope that members of the House of Lords will do the right thing and stop this bill from becoming law in its current form

Sign our petition against voter ID

The government’s Elections Bill returns to the House of Commons on Monday 17th January despite the opposition against their plans growing from all sides of the chamber.

The bill has faced fierce opposition from campaigners, academics and civil society groups and the Electoral Reform Society have been amongst those leading the campaign against this dangerous legislation.

Far from improving our politics, the Elections Bill will erode public confidence in our democracy at a time when it is already worryingly low. After what seems like months of scandals and sleaze the government are attempting to pass a bill that will hand huge powers to the government of the day over how our elections are run and how they are regulated.

Opposition has grown in recent months – in December a report by the cross-party House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) joined calls from campaigners to pause the bill, with the Conservative committee Chair William Wragg saying the bill’s proposals “lack a sufficient evidence base, timely consultation, and transparency, all of which should be addressed before it makes any further progress.”

Alongside proposals for mandatory voter ID at polling stations, which could see millions turned away for lacking the required identification, the bill would give ministers new power over the work of the Electoral Commission – risking the independence of the elections watchdog.

Ministers have also used the bill to sneak in changes to the electoral system for Mayors and Police and Crime Commissioners – adding new clauses during the committee stage that would see the Supplementary Vote downgraded in favour of imposing Westminster’s broken First Past the Post System.

The move, which ministers disingenuously claim will make it easier for the public to ‘kick out’ underperforming officials, would in fact damage accountability and undermine the legitimacy of those elected.

What is more, there has been little in the way of meaningful consultation on many of the most dangerous provisions in this bill, last-minute amendments also mean key bits of this legislation have yet to receive any proper scrutiny within parliament. This is no way to make effective legislation.

It’s clear now that the government’s Elections Bill proposals are less about improving our democracy than they are an attack on voters’ ability to cast their ballot and have their voice count.

Ministers have attempted to dodge scrutiny over key parts of this bill and the result is a dangerous mix of proposals that risk shutting voters out of our democracy and weakening the integrity of our elections.

From plans to shut voters out from the ballot box for lacking the right ID, to minsters’ power grab over our independent elections watchdog, this bill stands to damage democracy.

Opposition to the bill is widespread and growing, with MPs from all parties now calling on the government to stop and re-think their plans for changing election law. It’s time for the government to listen.”

It’s time ministers went back to the drawing board and brought forward new plans to improve our democracy.

Sign our petition to protect your right to vote