And another thing…

Worst kind of conservatism: counter productive tradition with an entertainment oriented target, ignoring the real issue of increasing turnout.

You must forgive my ignorance but can parts of a Bill become law before the rest of it?

I assume you meant when parliament is “dissolved” rather than “prorogued”. A small point, but these matters are important if there is to be an election.

Glad there’s an exception for the islands – wouldn’t want boatmen or helicopter pilots risking their lives to carry ballot boxes around at night when they can do it more safely the next morning. Of course, that’s only four constituencies!

Its a pity it came to this. I am pleased we are not going backwards having later counts.
It perhaps reflects how some people see parliament as much reduced in circumstances.

The local regional council in this case highlands has put out a poll of what the local community councils recomendations would be for the election count on the night or to make it the next day.

Not surprisingly an MSP that was there was for the the count, that night but there was also a good percentage of the community for the count to be held the next day.

It seems that as it would be cheaper to count the next day was the main reason for this view.

It roughly was about 40/40% with about 20% with no view. I wonder if we as a population are just becoming a bit more canny with spending money.

Well done, the spirit of parliamament seems still to breathe, even though faintly

In fact, the Western Isles vote is usually counted overnight, with the result announced before many mainland seats. The only reason that didn’t happen at the 2007 Holyrood election is because the helicopter broke down.

Richard Gadsden:

Funnily enough, the Western Isles constituency (I know it has a new name now) is usually one of the first seats to declare on election night.

For some reason they don’t normally have any problem collecting the ballot boxes and counting the votes. Their result is usually one of the first 100 to be declared at about 1am.

Here’s the latest counting information in the seats where the election will be decided:

http://bit.ly/bKEYBv

I oppose almost everything you, David Cairns, and your party, both in Scotland and in the UK as a whole have done.
But this one’s OK by me. Good job.

Now, we can look forward to the election count being held properly. my only worry is that this comes too late for those constituencies where the CEO has already dictated the count will be held the next day…
Will this be early enough to force compliance, or will some beg off and claim that plans are too late to be changed?

Thanks for your efforts.

Is there anything stopping them starting the count for half an hour, then all going to bed before finishing it in the morning?

Why can’t you start counting as soon as the first ballot box is full?

Take it to a seperate location, open it and start. You’d have the result a few minutes after the polling stations closed.

If X-Factor can do it…

Amazing how general election night can be saved at the drop of a hat, but Lord Mandeslon sadly couldn’t find time to debate the future of the Post Office in Parliament a few months back.

Funny old world, eh.

Excellent news.

Putting my “is there a loophole?” hat on for a moment, make sure the definition of what a count requires is specifically laid out.

We don’t want local authorities complying with the letter of the law – but only having one person in the hall counting a single box v.e.r.y s.l.o.w.l.y until the next morning when the rest of the team turn up, do we?

Most of the public could hardly care less about anything but the expense of all this, and the likelihood that bank counter staff will be slower than usual on the friday.

The issue of increasing turnout, which has dwindled so sadly, would be addressed to some extent by polling on a sunday.

Together with the likely introduction of AV we should expect turnouts to be 5 – 10% greater, which, in view of the disengagement of many with politics, would be new life for the important and more central aspects of our politics.

Political enthusiasts and the most partisan mistake their importances too often. Labour must speak to those who shortly may speak themselves.

Quietzapple: “Together with the likely introduction of AV we should expect turnouts to be 5 – 10% greater…”

At the risk of pushing this thread off in a completely different direction, what makes you think that the introduction of AV would buck the trend of reducing>/i> turnout, as has happened every time we’ve switched away from FPTP?

Tom,

Given the clause to require counting on the night of the election (of which you wholehearedly approve) is in the same bill as the AV referendum (of which you do not), do you really want to see it passed before prorogation?

Is perhaps the threat of election night clause reaching the statute book enough to push returning officers in the right direction?

Whatever happens, well done on the campaign. Election night would be a massive disappointment without counts on the night.

Matt.

This is splendid news, Tom.

We shall toast your good name at every Portillo moment on election night )

QZ said “Worst kind of conservatism: counter productive tradition with an entertainment oriented target, ignoring the real issue of increasing turnout”

…as opposed to the worst kind of socialism: “ooooh it might be a little bit hard, never mind lets not try & do the right thing, lets make it easier so that even the most “challenged” can be winners too – And lets EVERYONE have a pay rise to celebrate! ”

Increasing turnout???? Ptttthpt!!!!You’ll be lucky!

These council leaders etc are paid fortunes. If they can’t even organise an election count in a timely manner once every five years, what exactly are they good at?

Poor, p poor Taxed;

“What are these Council leaders good at?”

Ask Lord Hanningfield, who recently resigned as one of Chameleon’s front bench, and also as Leader of Essex County Council, quite some months after Labour disciplined the 3 MPs also accused of expenses crimes, which divers trolls have been highlighting recently.

As he was in two political jobs, and Chameleon left him in those posts those months after the original accusations, you may be sure his answer would have the imprimateur of the chosen one.

But ignorance and a rant suit most, so I doubt any will seek to enlighten themselves about election counts, let alone the superior timing in countries with higher turnouts than ours.

Tom: What makes you think that the local, Euro and other polls which don’t use FPTP are comparable to GEs?

Many if not most people who think about them at all treat them as a means of bashing HMG midterm. The “issues” relevant to other levels of representation are often ignored, as people simply utter their “x” like a grunt.

AV in a Parliamentary GE will bring out those who imagine that they will have a bigger say, as, in some circumstances, they will. many will enjoy not putting across opposite one of their 3 candidates, or 5 of the 9 perhaps?

It will be important to ensure that those who only wish to express their one preference are aware that they can do this.

Hurrah – Election Night Party back on!

This whole debate has been hilarious to watch for the self interest of the political class and their refusal to address the issues.

Returning Officers are rightly independent from politicians. Still accountable to the courts but independent of politicians. They have a responsibility to manage an accurate and secure count. That is what important. The voters are the centre of all this and we want accuracy not speed. Politicians – those who benefit directly from a quick count (is it a well paid job or a P45?…tell me now!) – are the ones now bullying the Returning Officers into a “tradition”. Putting the beneficiaries in charge is a worrying trend – you will be making the rules for your own expenses next. (Oh sorry I forgot we tried that…..)

Turnout fell. In response, the law on postal votes changed – postal votes on demand – meaning there are loads more than there ever used to be. Unforeseen circumstance – all the fraud, so the law changed again so that the signatures have to be checked.

The law still says that you can hand your postal vote in up to 10pm. Lots are handed in on the day of poll. Don’t ask me why, but they are. Fine – get as many votes in as possible. All the hundreds or thousands of votes handed in on the day will need to be signature checked – rules introduced by parliament – before they can be counted. Fair enough. But I understand that this will take time. So be it, we want accuracy. If it takes all night with results at 4 or 5am? Forget it, start the next day, tell me the result at lunchtime or tea time.

Then you get all this drivel about drama. The only people who are worried about it are the politicians, the journalists and the odd political anorak. Most other people go to bed and think about it all the next day. As David Monks said on Today this morning, it isn’t about entertainment, it is about accuracy. But Justin Webb – a smug journalist – just ignored the point.

Returning Officers as far as I can tell from the papers were not proposing this change to suit themselves, for their own convenience, they were looking at the best way to get an accurate result. It isn’t about cash either – elections are paid for by central government, not councils. They as professionals- responsible as individuals to the courts – looked at the issues and decided this was best in some circumstances.

No one has brought forward a decent argument on why a next day count is wrong. Who cares really for the sake of a few hours. It is the self interest of politicians that is driving this one.

The disillusionment with politicians – e.g. the expenses scandals – is driving down turnout. Not a lack of “drama” of election night.

The supreme irony is that this ammendment is on the back of a bill including a referendum on yet another change to the voting system. More fiddling with the system. Wait and see how long an AV count will take!

“Returning Officers as far as I can tell from the papers were not proposing this change to suit themselves, for their own convenience.”

How do you know that? Because that’s what they said?

“Lots (of ostal votes) are handed in on the day of poll”

How many? What per centage of the total vote is handed in on polling day? Even EROs refuse to say. Can’t think why…

“EROs refuse to say”. Do you mean ERO as in Electoral Registration Officers? They wouldn’t know. ROs – Returning Officers – would.

Still no decent argument.

Graeme Johnson:
Are you suggesting that all the ros who are counting on the night are being irresponsible and will provide inaccurate results? By 2005, fewer and fewer were counting the next day and I do n’t recall a lot of complaints about inaccuracy. Actually I agree with Mr Monks that the coverage programme is not entertainment, any more than news programmes and weather bulletins are. We need to know the results as soon as possible in the same way that we want to know breaking news – it does n’t make any difference that it might be “dramatic”.

This really is excellent news. Returning officers are supposed to serve the public – we are not there to serve them. This Friday voting malarkey seems to be typical of the approach of local authorities and their over-paid and increasingly unaccountable chief executives.

I hope that this clause makes its way to the statute book before Dissolution – and that the clause on the AV finds its way into the round circular file known as the bin. The PM’s love-in with electoral reform is one deathbed conversion too far.

@sbjme19

No, what I am saying is that it is a decision that should be up to the RO. They are accountable to the courts for the conduct of the election. They have to do it right or else they as indivduals are called to account by the courts. In some constituencies it might be wholly appropriate to do it overnight. In others perhaps it makes sense to do it the next day. With this personal responsibility they will be analysing what is the best approach for their area. In a small compact area with few postal voters maybe an overnight count can be done with little risk of it taking that much longer than in the past. In a bigger constituency with many postal voters a next day count might be wise to avoid things going on all night.

The point is that ROs are responsible for the count. They take the hit if it goes wrong.

It is not about really about accuracy either although that can be a concern. You also miss the point I made that things have changed since 2005. ROs now have a lot more to do overnight. A calm relaxed atmosphere is best for the count surely? Why the pressure to do it so fast?

Of course another factor is the pressure that will have been brought to bear on the ROs by politicians. If you listen to the complaints of politicians recently several of them have been saying that they would be meeting with their RO to talk to them about the count…..read that as an application of pressure to “persuade” them to do the sensible thing. I would be willing to bet that lots of those going for the overnight would rather – on the basis of detailed planning and risk management – go for Friday, but they have been talked to by the their local politicians….

If politicians want to keep fiddling with the voting system they could maybe get rid of postal voting on demand. As I said AV will make this worse. Couting AV voters will take ages with all the shufflign round from candidate to candidate. Unless you count electronically of course – with scanning machines – and that raises other issues.

The issue is the pompous pronouncements from politicians about things they seem to know little. Tom Harris’s latest outburst above in this blog about the Electoral Commission is typical. The Commission are independent of politicians too and are on the side of the voter. They are rightly pointing out that this is a poorly drafted ammendment. Full of bluster and outrage Tom is wading in – How dare independent experts say that! I want tradition….I want my exciting night in the limelight. Forget what makes sense, forget reasoned argument….I want the result now!

I mean come on there is an independent Electoral Commission for a reason. He is happy with the independent voices as long as they do not challenge his views.

@Andrew – yes RO’s are there to serve the voter. That is the point. The voter not the politicians. Do you really want the administration of elections at the whim of the government, maybe with legislation drafted to skew the result? That is why there is a separation of policy and administration. Let the adminstrators work out how to do the election.

As I keep on saying the ROs are personally accountable. If you think they are doing a bad job take them to court, let the judge decide.

Does it really make a difference whether you get a result at 3am or 12 noon ? Where were all the complaints when we voted on Thursday and the count was on Sunday for the European elections?