Select committee: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Conclusion 29

Second Report - The Work of the Electoral Commission Published 20 Oct 2022 Paragraph 107

Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee The Work of the Electoral Commission All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

Conclusion (the committee's words)

Operational independence is a fundamental aspect of the Electoral Commission. The Government’s ability to set the strategic direction of the Electoral Commission through the issuance of a Strategy and Policy Statement, as set out in the Elections Act 2022, significantly alters the Electoral Commission’s relationship to Government as an independent body. We welcome the three month statutory consultation period for the draft Strategy and Policy Statement and will continue to take an active interest in this area of constitutional significance, supporting the statutory consultees where appropriate. Following the consultation, it is vital that the Statement is afforded appropriate scrutiny through super-affirmative parliamentary scrutiny. As highlighted in our Fifth Report of Session 2021–22 on the Elections Bill, the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission, as the body that will scrutinise the Electoral Commission’s compliance with the Statement going forward, must be seen to exercise its powers impartially, with cross-party support. We note the support from witnesses to our inquiry that no single party should exercise a majority on the Speaker’s Committee.

From: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Second Report - The Work of the Electoral Commission (HC 462), paragraph 107, 20 October 2022

Government response

Fifth Special Report: The Work of the Electoral Commission: Electoral Commission response to the Committee’s Second Report of Session 2022-23

The government responded to the whole report on 9 March 2023 (deadline 20 December 2022).

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The Electoral Commission, responding to the Committee's report, welcomes much of it and says it is "committed to continuous improvement", while setting out where it disagrees or urges caution, including on fixed investigation time limits.

On advice response times, from 1 April 2023 it will aim to respond to 90% of email queries within three working days and 100% within five; during the May election period it will aim to respond to all enquiries within three working days, as it is "not confident" its resources allow a faster turnaround on every query.
It does not support putting a 12-month limit on investigations in legislation, saying this "risks fettering our discretion". Its draft Enforcement Policy instead proposes an independent review of investigations approaching 12 months, and it intends the new policy to be in place after the May 2023 polls.
It says the maximum civil fine of £20,000 "should be raised" to give it greater flexibility, and that a fine of that size is not a proportionate deterrent for serious offences.
It says a strategy and policy statement, by which a government can guide its work, is "inconsistent" with the independent role of an electoral commission.

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error

Fourth Special Report - The Work of the Electoral Commission: Government Response to the Committee’s Second Report

Published 19 January 2023.

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The Government agrees that simplifying and consolidating electoral law would be desirable, but gives priority to implementing the Elections Act 2022, and it expressly disagrees with one recommendation on consultation timeframes.

On consolidating electoral law, it calls this "a long-term project" that is "not something to rush", and says its "immediate priority" is implementing the Elections Act changes.
On shorter investigation time limits, it says it will "continue to keep under review" aligning the PPERA regime with the RPA regime, and "will consider" the evidence from witnesses.
On higher maximum fines, it "considers the existing levels of penalties available to the Commission suitable" and says any extension "would need to be considered carefully".
On the Strategy and Policy Statement, it states it "does not agree" with applying the same consultation timeframe to future Statements, calling this "overly rigid and inflexible".

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error