Board minutes: 13 March 2019

No apologies.

No new declarations of interest.

Resolved: That the minutes of the Commission Board meeting on 13 February 2019 be agreed.

Bob Posner confirmed that the hearing with the Speaker’s Committee had been postponed to 18 March. We understand that Treasury had no specific observations to make, and were broadly supportive of the proposed budget, though concerned that further increases should not be proposed for future years.

Bob Posner introduced the paper suggesting key themes in the annual report. There was a need to find the right balance between marking our achievements and appearing self-congratulatory.

The Board encouraged a greater emphasis on the work we have done with the devolved nations, particularly Wales and Scotland. There could be a stand-alone section on this. The Board also suggested that the report should continue to emphasise the need for legislative reform.

The Board requested that the Annual Report highlight specific examples of areas of progress, perhaps by Directorate, and suggested including reference to the contingency planning work that we have done to ensure preparedness for a range of potential polls, and to the work we had done on digital campaigning. There should also be references to the work of the Audit Committee and the Remuneration and Human Resources Committee. Areas where we had missed our targets should be mentioned as necessary.

Resolved: That the paper be noted, subject to the comments made.

Bob Posner introduced the paper, and noted that we needed to be comfortable with the balance between risk appetite and risk capacity. The Audit Committee looked in depth at the risk matrix but the Board needed to take an overview as well.

The Board noted that the most serious risk we faced was damage to our reputation, and asked for this to be more specifically reflected in the risks matrix. The awareness of reputational risk cut across a number of risks identified in the paper. There was also a need to look again at the definitions of red, amber and green to make sure we were getting them right, and to take account of how the risk context could change quickly.

The Board heard how information was gathered from local authorities around the country on whether they had the resources and the capacity to deliver elections. This information was reflected in the risk ratings.

Action: That risk and assurance be the topic for a future Commissioner Day.Consider how to revise risk one to better acknowledge reputational risk as important to the organisation.

Resolved: That the paper be noted.

Craig Westwood introduced the paper, and explained the two recommendations – one for a specific new project on helping educate the young on electoral issues, and the other for enhancing information provision within business as usual procedures. On the project, we had explored with an open mind how we would work with educators to deliver our work with them in this area. The aim was to move cautiously. We would initially focus work in Scotland and Wales, owing to the (actual and proposed) lower age franchise and forthcoming elections to the devolved legislatures. This would give us important insights that could be used in extending this work across the rest of the United Kingdom in the longer term. Where possible existing material would be used, for example from the ‘Democracy Cookbook’. The second recommendation was about putting in better links, using mainly the website, to important data about, for example, the location of polling stations.

The Board noted the political sensitivities about some of these issues, and concerns from some schools about engaging with politics in the classroom. Commissioners also noted that we needed to be aware of the mechanics of doing this well, and to take care to ensure that whatever we proposed fitted well into the world that teachers were operating in. Concerns were also expressed about how to reach those not in formal education.

The Board discussed the legislated role of the Commission and the extent to which there were restrictions on what we could do in educational terms. Various potential partners in this work were discussed, including the BBC, the Department for Education, and Young Scot. There was agreement that our approach should be developed iteratively in order to ensure it was fit for purpose. It was also noted that, in the context of the reduction of the franchise to 16 in Scotland, a lot of such educational work was already happening.

There was also discussion about the respective roles of the Commission and of political parties in inspiring young people to vote. The Board noted that our role was not to tell people to vote, but to offer information and advice on how to register and vote, and how to better understand the electoral system. It was agreed that we should focus on providing resources to support teaching only in that context, and seek to adapt our approach as we gained more experience.

Resolved: That the paper be approved, subject to the comments made.

Tim Crowley and Natasha Hutchinson provided an update on the project to develop the new website, and demonstrated the more flexible functionality of the new site, including much improved search facilities. The Board welcomed the work under way.

Resolved: That the presentation be noted.

The Board received an update on the contingency plans for unscheduled electoral events. It was a very busy period but good progress was being made on many fronts.

Following a legal challenge from an individual, the UK government was expecting a court judgement very soon on whether ID pilots could go ahead at the May local elections.

The Board heard about the proactive work we were doing to register new political parties and to improve the party register overall. There had been encouraging engagements in this area. We were also increasing our outreach to members’ associations, such as companies or unincorporated bodies that were made up wholly or mainly of members of a political party

The Board received an update on current litigation.

The Board was updated on the inquiry by the House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) into Electoral Law. We would be making a written submission and sharing what we had submitted with other interested parties, to help influence their approaches. Commissioners noted that the PACAC inquiry was an important opportunity for us to lay out what changes in election law we would like to see.

The Board was updated on some of the recent work that Human Resources have done, and the proposed changes to our approach to hiring staff on fixed-term contracts. There was also an update on the National Audit Office’s (NAOs) interim audit of the annual accounts, which had gone well.

Anna Carragher provided an update relating to Northern Ireland.

Sue Bruce left the meeting at this point.

Action: The approach to and scope of the proposed submission to PACAC on the electoral law reform inquiry be shared with the Board.

Resolved: That the paper be noted.

Action: Explore adding an Audit Committee meeting in April.

Explore opportunity to liaise with the Australian, New Zealand, and Canadian electoral commissions at the July Commissioner Day.

Add scoping of modernising voting project to the “items to be allocated” section of the work plan.

Resolved: That the paper be noted.

Resolved: That the paper be noted.

Resolved: That the paper be noted.