Recommendation 69

HM Government · verbatim extract Acknowledged

Response: The Government is committed to upholding and strengthening UK democracy by protecting against foreign interference, improving political transparency, adding tougher checks for donations and closing loopholes. The Government welcomes the Committee’s ongoing interest in this important issue, and we look forward to engaging further on these matters in the future. We recognise the continued risk posed by actors who seek to interfere with and undermine our democratic processes. Hence, we are introducing tougher rules on political donations to protect UK elections, striking the right balance between safeguarding against foreign interference whilst making sure that legitimate donors can continue to fund electoral campaigns. These changes will effectively meet an evolving and sophisticated threat to ensure the UK is not vulnerable to illicit political donations from abroad. I am writing following the publication of the Committee’s report on the 2024 general election during the summer. We very much agree with the Committee that the electoral system is coming under increasing pressure. We welcome the clear recommendations which would improve the resilience of the system, and better support administrators to deliver, and voters to take part in, future elections. I wanted to update you on how we are taking forward the specific recommendations for the Commission’s work, and some further thinking on the report’s recommendations. The Committee recommended the Commission establish clear criteria for assessing how effectively an election has been run, and that objective measures beyond our public opinion survey should be established. We will do this as part of our new Corporate Plan. We intend to use the performance standards to provide a comprehensive view of the general health of the electoral system across England. As part of this work we will consider if there are additional elements that would enhance the use of the performance standards to give assurance that elections are well run. Our Corporate Plan also sets out our proposals for regular health checks on the electoral system, identifying where changes are needed to mitigate risks to well-run elections and take measures to address them. We are happy to keep the Committee updated on progress. This would be in addition to how the Commission currently assesses elections. We use public opinion surveys to measure public confidence in democracy and the electoral process, as one part of the Commission’s current assessment criteria for elections. We also consider data gathered from electoral administrators, including on registration, postal voting, and turnout. The Commission assesses the performance of Returning Officers and Electoral Registration Officers against our performance standards frameworks. Alongside this, we monitor election petitions and report every year on data about cases of alleged electoral fraud. These enable us to make an objective assessment against clear outcomes and to identify where improvements in administration and delivery can be made. Our surveys of electoral administrators and candidates provide additional information and background on what they found went well, and what didn’t, at the election. We also seek feedback from polling station staff. While surveys naturally have their limitations, the feedback we gather allows us to make an overall assessment of the election, and identify clear examples of issues at the elections. For example, our candidate survey last year identified a clear trend of increasing abuse and intimidation of candidates, while our administrator survey identified problems many had in staffing delivery of the polls. We are confident that this evidence base, taken together, enables us to provide a robust assessment of how the election was delivered, and of the experience of those participating. We will, however, continue to consider whether other evidence sources could help to supplement this assessment, as part of the Corporate plan work. The Committee highlighted that the timing of the election placed additional pressures on electoral administrators and stretched the resilience of suppliers, as we found in our post-poll report. Your report recommends that the Commission produce guidance to mitigate against some of these difficulties for a future awkwardly timed election. Ahead of recent general elections–and those in 2017 and 2019–we published early planning guidance for Returning Officers to help them prepare for the polls and to think about key considerations. This guidance reflects the particular circumstances of an upcoming election, including the impacts of other electoral administration activity taking place at the same time and key legislative changes made since the previous polls. Our guidance for electoral administrators also explains that they should keep their plans for a general election under review, and build in contingency planning for risks to delivery including from suppliers. They should also ca