Further reform of the annual canvass and electoral registration
An effective canvass process is an important tool to provide for high-quality registers at all times and to minimise the need for significant updates ahead of major polls. However, evidence from our analysis of canvass data in recent years continues to suggest that the reformed canvass process is still not fully picking up ongoing population movement.
This means that EROs will continue to face the challenge of processing large numbers of registration applications in the period immediately before major electoral events, from new electors or from people who have changed address and were not picked up by the canvass. This continues to increase risks to the resilience of electoral administration teams in the pre-election period, when they are under significant resource pressures and have critical election deadlines to meet.
Annual canvass reform
There is some evidence that canvass reform has addressed one aspect of sustainability, by reducing the resource consumed by unnecessarily chasing households where there has been no change. However, our analysis has again highlighted signs that it has not had a positive impact on the other key aspect, the system’s ability to pick up population changes away from major electoral events.
It is therefore important for the government to explore further options to improve canvass processes. This should include reviewing whether there are other central data sources that could be used instead of, or as well as, DWP data to improve the reliability and accuracy of the data matching step.
Recommendation 1: Review options for improving data matching
The UK Government should review the effectiveness of using different sources of data to improve the quality of the data matching process used as part of the annual canvass.
This should include identifying and evaluating other sources of data that are owned or managed by or on behalf of the UK Government. It should consider whether other sources of data could be used instead of or in addition to data held by DWP that is currently used as part of the canvass.
Our analysis of the 2023 annual canvass data also shows that many households continue not to respond to the canvass, including where the data matching step has indicated that changes may be needed. Further research is needed on the effectiveness of different approaches to canvassing properties, including the design and messaging of canvass communications, to establish whether changes could be made that would likely improve response rates.
We will carry out further analysis of this data to better understand what factors may have the most significant impact on responses to canvass communications, particularly for those properties where data matching suggests that changes might need to be made. We will identify areas that appear to be outliers in terms of response rates, and use that information to prioritise our engagement with EROs and their teams ahead of the 2024 canvass. This will help us to identity further evidence about the impact of different approaches to contacting properties during the canvass. We will also consider whether changes may be needed to improve the design and usability of canvass communications, to help improve response rates.
Electoral registration reform
While our most recent accuracy and completeness study did not find that there had been a decline in the quality of the registers, it also did not find evidence of improvement. The results of successive canvasses suggest that the accuracy and completeness of the registers are not likely to improve significantly without major changes to the current electoral registration system.
We continue to recommend that governments should further reform electoral registration so that registering and updating address details is as easy as possible for people who aren’t correctly registered to vote, and managing electoral registration is more efficient for EROs. We highlighted in our accuracy and completeness report several innovations which could be delivered in practice within the current system of electoral registration in the UK:
Automatic registration would involve a data source organisation (DSO), such as a government department or a public sector organisation, providing EROs with recently updated data on the names and addresses of people who are eligible to register to vote. In cases where the DSO has all the data needed for a registration application and has verified a person’s identity, the ERO could add the individual to the register without that person needing to take any action. For example, HM Passport Office could share the data of those applying for passports whose identities it had verified. EROs would write to those individuals explaining that they are going to be placed on the register and give them the option of being registered as an anonymous elector if they have safety concerns about being registered as an ordinary elector.
Integrated registration would involve electoral registration being integrated within another public service transaction. At the end of a transaction, people would be asked whether they also want to register to vote. If they confirm that they do, relevant data would be transferred to a registration application. The individual would be provided with information about eligibility to vote and asked to confirm their eligibility. They would then provide any missing data, such as National Insurance Number, to complete the application. Some universities, such as Sheffield and Cardiff, already do this by including an electoral registration module into online student enrolment with those universities. Such an approach could be integrated into driving licence applications or updating address details with a government or public sector body.
Assisted registration would involve a government department or public sector body providing EROs with recently updated data about the names and addresses of people who may be eligible to vote. Assisted registration differs from automatic registration because the DSO would not have all the data needed for the ERO to automatically register an individual. Therefore, the ERO would need to write to those people explaining the eligibility criteria and inviting them to register if they are eligible. The invitation would ask them to provide any missing data needed to complete the application. For example, one option would be for HMRC to share data about those about to turn 16 with EROs. EROs would write to those young people inviting them to register either by completing a paper application form pre-populated with that data or developing a system that allows them to scan a QR that links to a pre-populated online form.
Signposting registration would involve providing an individual with information about registering to vote during a transaction with, or communication from, an organisation or public body. This could include a prompt directing the individual to the UK Government’s Register to Vote website. This option could work in a number of scenarios, for example at the end of transaction when applying for a driving licence or passport or when updating their details with a government department, body or agency. It does not necessarily need to be limited to government or public sector bodies. We are currently exploring the possibility of working with the UK’s three tenancy deposit schemes to include signposting registration in their communications.
Recommendation 2: Delivering modern registration processes
The electoral community needs a clear plan to ensure that electoral registration processes are modernised so that people are registered and able to exercise their right to vote.
As part of this plan the UK, Scottish and Welsh governments should pass legislation that creates clear legal gateways for government departments and public sector bodies to share data on potentially eligible individuals with Electoral Registration Officers. This is needed to enable EROs to register them to vote directly, or to send them targeted invitations to register.
All three governments should require relevant departments and other public bodies to work with EROs to facilitate electoral registration using their data. A consistent approach between governments would ensure that changes are developed and delivered in a way which makes it as straightforward as possible for EROs and data source organisations, and ensures that voters are accurately included in the registers for all types of elections they are eligible to vote in.
The UK Government should develop the existing Individual Electoral Registration (IER) digital service so that it can support secure and efficient data sharing between data source organisations and EROs and their electoral management software systems, to enable modern registration processes to be delivered.