Understanding the Representation of the People Bill
The UK government has published The Representation of the People Bill. The bill covers:
- introducing more automated forms of voter registration
- lowering the voting age so that 16-year-olds can vote in all UK elections
- expanding the list of accepted voter ID
- strengthening political finance controls
- giving candidates more protection from abuse
- strengthening the enforcement of political finance laws
"Any changes to the electoral system must ultimately deliver improvements for voters. As the bill progresses, the Commission will be clear about the scale and complexity of the changes and whether they can be delivered effectively without compromising security or accessibility."
Electoral registration reforms
The bill includes provisions to enable automatic or direct registration. Electoral registration officers would have a duty to register eligible voters using Council and other accurate data, without waiting for them to submit an application form. This would simplify processes for voters.
Our electoral registration research shows that as many as 8 million people are currently unregistered. In some constituencies, this represents a fifth of eligible voters missing from the electoral register.
Introducing more automated or automatic forms of registration would make participation in elections easier. It would remove barriers for voters and make it easier for them to register and vote.
The UK government is exploring several options for more automated forms of voter registration. These range from integrated registration – where applications for other services, like getting a passport or driving licence, prompt users to register to vote – to automatic registration, where individuals are added to the register using data already available without having to make an application.
For these changes to be in place by the next general election, the government needs to start piloting schemes in early 2027. However, they could start developing the technical infrastructure and planning now to maximise the time available to implement the changes.
Groups less likely to be registered to vote (data from Great Britain in 2022)
| % registered | |
|---|---|
| People aged 18-34 | 71 |
| Ethnic minorities | 77 |
| Private renters | 65 |
| Recent movers | 39 |
| Overall population | 86 |
Our role
We would independently evaluate registration pilots, considering the benefits offered to voters and administrators by each approach.
Our evaluation of the automatic voter registration pilots in Wales found that they were successful in identifying and automatically adding just over 14,500 new voters to the registers. This represented between 2-8% of the register in each local authority area.
If automatic registration is introduced, we would continue to provide guidance and support to electoral administrators, and ensure the public understand the changes.
We will continue to regularly measure the accuracy and completeness of electoral registers.
We also currently run public awareness campaigns to promote voter registration ahead of elections. We will continue to do this, adapting our campaign approach to ensure it reflects the final registration model and accounting for possible divergence across the UK.
Our view
Making registration more automated would remove some of the steps people have to take to participate in elections. It would make registering to vote easier and more accessible.
There is clear scope to improve the current system by linking electoral registration with other public services, and by using automatic or more automated forms of registration. This would help get people registered and reduce the workload for electoral administrators.
While full automatic voter registration may take longer, significant progress on automated registration should be made before the next general election. This will encourage greater participation and support newly enfranchised 16 and 17 year olds.
We urge the government to work quickly to introduce automated systems to add voters to UK parliamentary electoral registers, so that the improvements are in place in time to register voters for the next general election.
The success of the pilots in Wales provides useful evidence for the government to take into account when implementing more automated forms of registration across the UK.
The government could consider building more automated forms of registration into services people already use. For example, applying for a passport, updating a driving licence, or when a National Insurance Number is issued shortly before a young person turns 16.
Votes at 16
Lowering the voting age to 16 and 17-year-olds in all UK elections will give around 1.7 million additional people the right to vote. It would align the voting age with devolved elections in Scotland and Wales, where 16- and 17-year-olds already have the right to vote.
Young people who have just gained the right to vote are more likely to take part in elections if they understand how the voting process works and what they need to do.
Access to democratic education is crucial to providing the information and confidence young people need. There are also practical changes to the way we vote that could help newly enfranchised voters participate, such as simplifying registration and considering the forms of ID young people have access to.
Most young people support learning more about politics and elections
| % | |
|---|---|
| Young people think children and young people should learn more about politics in school/college | 72 |
| Young people want to learn more about what difference their vote makes | 53 |
Evidence shows that the earlier a young person is taught about politics, the more likely they are to engage with democracy,
Research across several countries and states that have lowered their voting ages shows that when enfranchised, 16 and 17-year-olds tend to vote in greater numbers than those enfranchised at 18. 16 and 17-year-olds can already vote in Scottish Parliament elections, Senedd elections, and local elections in Scotland and Wales.
Our recent research also found that 16 to 17 year olds are the least likely group to be on the register.
Our role
We will work with the UK government and provide practical advice on how changes to lowering the voting age can be implemented.
Our priorities will be to:
- ensure that all new voters know how to register and vote
- ensure new voters have access to educational material through their schools, colleges and communities
- support the electoral community to deliver these changes effectively.
We already have education resources available which can be used in schools across the UK. We are also continuing to scale up our education work in the coming years to ensure all young people have access to democratic education.
The Curriculum and Assessment review in England recommended improvements to democratic education, making citizenship education mandatory from primary. This is in line with the recommendations we made with other organisations in the education sector.
In the lead up to the curriculum’s publication in 2027, we will work with the Department for Education, schools and partner organisations to enhance citizenship education.
We are also working with education departments in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Alongside the plans to lower the voting age, we need to ensure young people get the support they need to develop their understanding of democracy. This will enable them to fully participate in elections.
Our view
New young voters need to be able to register to vote and have access to accepted forms of voter ID.
As the government implements more automated forms of registration, we will work with them to ensure any data sources used to register young people come from services used by them. The list of accepted IDs also needs to include forms of ID that young people are more likely to carry.
We have also called for further updates to the curriculum to help prepare young people to cast their vote confidently. All children should have the opportunity to participate in democratic education throughout their time in school.
"Voting is habit-forming so in order to build future generations of engaged and involved citizens, it’s important to support early understanding of how to take part in elections, engage in robust and respectful debate, and critically examine information."
Expanding the list of accepted voter ID
The UK government has proposed:
- expanding the list of ID accepted at polling stations, to include bank cards as a non-photo form of voter ID
- introducing a digital voter authority certificate
- introducing digital versions of ID that will be accepted at polling stations.
At the 2024 general election, most people were able to successfully vote. However, some did face challenges due to needing ID to vote at a polling station. Our research found:
- fewer than 0.1% of people in Great Britain who tried to vote at a polling station were unable to because they could not present an accepted form of ID
- around 4% of people who did not vote said that the requirement to show ID was a factor
- that the requirement to show voter ID affected some people more than others, particularly people from a disadvantaged background.
Our role
We will continue to share our findings, recommendations and analysis of how the voter ID requirements have been implemented since the policy came into force.
We will inform voters of any changes to the list of accepted ID and continue to communicate when they need to show ID at polling stations. We will also work with groups of voters who are most likely to be impacted.
We will support electoral administrators and polling station staff to deliver any changes to the ID requirements. This will include providing guidance on checking ID at polling stations for Returning Officers and polling station staff.
Our view
Allowing voters to show bank cards as a form of ID is less secure than the current requirements where voters need to show photo ID at polling stations. This change may not help improve security and voter confidence, while increasing the administrative burden on polling station staff.
As banks cards do not include a photo and sometimes do not include a full name, polling station staff may not be able to verify that the person is who they say they are. It would also require staff to have a different way to check ID because there is no common format, design or validation feature for bank cards. This contrasts with other forms of ID that have clear formats, structures and validation features such as passports or driving licences.
We have previously recommended introducing ‘vouching’ or attestation at polling stations. Canada uses ‘vouching’ at its federal elections. It allows registered voters with an accepted form of ID to vouch for someone who does not have accepted ID. As a result, it keeps a link with a named voter who can prove their ID.
Adding digital ID to list of accepted forms ID to vote at a polling station would give voters more flexibility and options for proving their identity. Digital Voter Authority Certificates would also help voters if local councils could issue them closer to polling day.
The bill proposes no changes to voter ID in Northern Ireland. This means that bank cards will not be accepted as a form of voter ID in Northern Ireland. The rules on ID would remain different between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, which could cause voter confusion.
Strengthening political finance controls
The government’s proposed changes to the political finance regime are intended to strengthen the system by closing loopholes. This should in turn build public trust and confidence.
The government has proposed:
- changing the law so that only companies which have a connection to the UK and have generated revenue in the UK can make political donations
- introducing additional ‘know your donor’ checks by political parties
- closing some of the loopholes in the unincorporated associations regime.
Changes to company donations
The government has proposed introducing new controls on company donations. It places a limit on donations made by companies, based on how much revenue they have made, that applies separately to each recipient. This means a company could donate an amount equal to their revenue to a party and then donate the same amount to each of the party’s MPs, councillors and candidates. This would allow companies to make legitimate donations many times their revenue, with no guarantee of the source of these funds.
To be at all effective, the revenue limit must apply to the total value of all a company’s political donations in a calendar year, regardless of the number of recipients. This could be achieved by a declaration by the donor, with minimal administrative burden. We have no evidence to suggest that companies will struggle to keep track of the donations they make in a year.
The government has also proposed introducing additional requirements for company owners, intended to reduce the risk of a foreign entity using a company to make political donations.
‘Know your donor’ checks
Political parties, candidates and campaigners are responsible for ensuring donations made to them are from permissible sources. The government has proposed introducing additional ‘know your donor’ checks.
Parties, candidates and campaigners will need to assess the risk that certain donations and loans might come from an impermissible source.
This assessment would support campaigners when deciding whether to accept donations. It would also give voters confidence that the sources of funding are legitimate.
Charities complete similar ‘know your donor’ checks when accepting donations. Equivalent checks are also used in other industries, such as banking and financial services.
Unincorporated associations
An unincorporated association is an association of individuals who have come together to carry out a shared purpose. This could be as simple as two people who agree how to work together towards that shared purpose.
Currently, an unincorporated association is allowed to donate to political parties, candidates or campaigners if its main office is in the UK, and it is carrying on business or other activities in the UK. Unincorporated associations are not required to ensure that those who give them money are permissible donors.
This means that donors to unincorporated associations could legitimately make donations using funding from overseas sources. This will change under the bill’s proposals. Unincorporated associations subject to reporting requirements will need to ensure any money they receive for the purposes of making a political contribution is from a permissible source.
The government has also proposed lowering:
- the threshold for which unincorporated associations will need to register with us and report the money they receive (also called ‘gifts’)
- the value of gifts that need to be declared.
This will increase the transparency of donations made to unincorporated associations.
Our role
We will continue to regulate political finance, take action where rules are broken and ensure transparency for voters.
We will help political parties, candidates, campaigners, unincorporated associations and regulated donees to understand how they are affected by the changes and support them to comply with the new rules.
Our view
We have long called for reform to address the gaps in the political finance system. Significant changes are needed to reduce the risk of foreign money entering UK politics and provide greater transparency around the source of donations.
Some of the current government proposals could be strengthened.
The government’s proposals on donations would not reduce the risk of foreign money entering British politics through companies. They do not sufficiently close the current loophole, as it means companies could still donate more money overall than they have made in the UK.
We recommend that a company’s profit be used as the measure of its UK earnings, rather than revenue. Revenue provides no such guarantee, as it may not translate into any money retained by the company after costs.
Under the current proposals, company donations would effectively remain uncapped. The only limit to a company’s ability to donate would be the number of different parties, candidates and campaigners it can find to accept its money.
A campaigner’s ability to comply with the rules is essential to their effectiveness. These rules may be complex for campaigners to comply with. They should be introduced in a way that recognises the need for proportionality and limits the administrative burden on those accepting donations.
Giving candidates more protection from abuse
The UK government has proposed several changes to address the growing problem of candidate security. These include:
- adding a statutory aggravating factor in sentencing for certain election-related offences where they are motivated by hostility
- removing the requirement for candidates’ home addresses to be published
- extending disqualification orders to include offences against electoral staff.
There has been a worrying rise in the abuse and intimidation of candidates in recent years. This has a significant impact on individuals and can deter those considering standing, thereby limiting the diversity of candidates and choices for voters.
After the 2024 general election, our research into candidate safety found that over half (55%) of candidates felt that they had some kind of problem with harassment, intimidation, or abuse.
Women were twice as likely and ethnic minority respondents three times as likely to report serious abuse.
Our role
We will continue to:
- work with partners to support candidates, voters and the police to address abuse
- support candidates, campaigners and parties so they understand what constitutes abuse and where to go if they experience it
- carry out research with the public to better understand what drives unacceptable behaviour and use this to create evidence-based solutions.
Following the Speaker’s Conference recommendations, we are currently considering how a code of conduct for campaigning can facilitate a robust but respectful campaigning environment.
A code of conduct for campaigning will make it clear that campaigners are accountable for their conduct during election campaigns. Developing it in consultation with political parties and campaigners will provide a shared understanding of fair and open campaigning that is robust but respectful.
We will also work with the UK government to update guidance for police, Returning Officers and candidates on the safety and security of polling stations and count centres.
Our view
Introducing more robust penalties for intimidation should help deter would-be offenders from engaging in abusive behaviour toward those involved in elections. It reflects the seriousness of these offences, and accounts for the wider impact abuse has on democracy.
Removing the requirement to publish candidates’ home addresses will allow candidates to protect themselves by choosing not to have their personal information shared in a way which could make them vulnerable to abuse.
Our research found that 65% of abuse occurred online. Social media platforms must do more to remove abusive content and develop improved screening tools to identify perpetrators.
We recommend the government considers creating a new overarching duty on social media platforms operating in the UK. This could prevent risks to elections and protect political debate.
It would help provide clarity and a shared understanding of the actions platforms need to take during election periods. It would also provide a clearer basis for Ofcom to take action if rules are broken.
Democratic education must also play a part in tackling abuse. Reforming citizenship education would prepare young people to participate in democracy.
Strengthening enforcement of political finance laws
The government has proposed:
- de-criminalising certain administrative offences
- making us responsible for enforcing candidate, non-party campaigner and recall petition campaigner political finance offences
- providing more proportionate regulatory tools, including the increasing the maximum fine for political finance offences and improving how share information.
Our role
We are currently responsible for regulating parties and campaigners. These changes would extend our regulatory remit to include candidates and local non-party campaigners.
These offences would be subject to civil sanctions (for example, a fine or an enforcement undertaking) rather than criminal sanctions, such as imprisonment and a criminal record.
Our view
The proposed changes to how political finance law is enforced would make the penalties more proportionate to the offences. They would also make it easier for candidates to comply with the law.
Extending our remit to include enforcement of the rules for candidates and local third-party campaigners would create a more proportionate, effective and joined-up regime.
Improving how we share information with other organisations would allow closer collaboration. This would cover how we share information with the police and other regulators for the purpose of assisting them in their functions. It would allow us to work with partners more efficiently.
Increasing the maximum fine that parties or other campaigners might face would more effectively deter non-compliance. It would also give voters more confidence that offences would receive appropriate action.
The maximum fine should better reflect the size of donations and levels of spending in modern campaigning. The maximum fine is currently set in secondary legislation at £20,000. A maximum fine of £500,000 would support a more flexible, effective and proportionate enforcement regime.
What we'd also like to see included in the bill
Repealing the Strategy and Policy Statement
We welcome the Government's proposal to repeal the power to impose a Strategy and Policy Statement. This will ensure that our work to oversee elections remains independent and impartial, which is fundamental to public confidence.
Consolidating electoral law
The changes in the bill will add further complexity to electoral law. This will make it harder for electoral administrators and campaigners to deliver their roles. This may make errors more likely, which could negatively affect voters and their experience at elections.
Consolidating electoral law would simplify and modernise the extensive patchwork of electoral legislation. This would make it clearer for voters, easier for administrators to use, and would reduce the risk of its complexity and lack of clarity being exploited.
Making electoral law more accessible would:
- increase trust and transparency in the system
- reduce barriers to democratic engagement
- establish a more resilient electoral system
All of these are an essential part of our critical national infrastructure.
Changes to the bill
Changes to any electoral legislation need to be made clear to voters, administrators and campaigners at least six months before they are due to be implemented or complied with. We are asking the UK government to consider the following changes to the bill:
- to make sure more automated forms of voter registration are implemented and ready in time for the next general election. As it must be held by summer 2029, there is limited time for piloting, evaluating and implementing new registration methods.
- to use profit as the measure for how much money a company has made in the UK as the way to determine if they can donate to a party, rather than revenue. This would improve transparency in the system, be more workable, and more effectively prevent foreign money entering the system.
- to ensure any change to the electoral system improves the experience for voters and is proportionate for campaigners and parties. The government should also ensure changes are workable and keep or improve the system’s security and accessibility.