Report on the 2023 recall petition in Rutherglen and Hamilton West

For a petition to result in the removal of an MP, more than 10% of people eligible to sign the recall petition must have done so by the end of the six-week signing period. The total number of eligible signers for this petition was 81,123, meaning that the threshold for the petition to be successful was 8,113.

By the end of the signing period there were 11,896 valid signers, amounting to 14.7% of all those eligible to sign. This meant that the sitting MP was automatically recalled and a by-election would take place to fill the vacancy in the constituency. 

The UK Elections Act 2022 introduced a new requirement for people to show photo ID at polling places for UK parliamentary elections and at signing places for recall petitions in order to be issued with a ballot paper. This was the first recall petition at which these new rules were in force.

Six people were turned away from signing places because of a lack of accepted photo ID 

In order to monitor the impact of the new requirements, the PO agreed to collect data from each signing place to record the number of people turned away for the lack of accepted ID and the number of those who subsequently returned and were able to sign. This data had been collected for the May 2023 local elections in England but was more challenging to collate across a six-week signing period, particularly when the staff at the signing places changed over the period of the petition.

The data collected indicates that six people were turned away because of a lack of accepted ID. Two of those subsequently returned and were able to sign but the data collected does not enable us to verify whether the other four people returned. Overall, the six people initially turned away amounts to 0.1% of all signers who attended a signing place in person. 

Where people do not have an accepted form of photo ID they are entitled to apply to their Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) for a free Voter Authority Certificate. Data supplied by the ERO for Lanarkshire indicates that they received 15 applications for a Voter Authority Certificate in June and eight in July while the recall petition was open, around half of which were for the recall area. Four certificates were used in signing places during the six-week period.

Feedback from the PO’s staff on the recall petition indicated that they found it challenging to raise awareness of voter ID because of the specific circumstances of a petition. A recall petition is different from an election. At an election promoting awareness and providing information to support participation are possible without appearing to favour any particular candidate or party. This is not the case with a recall petition where there is a significant risk that active promotion could be seen as taking a side and could therefore potentially undermine the integrity of the recall petition. This limited the activity that both the PO and ERO – and indeed the Commission – could undertake in the run up to, and throughout the duration of, the petition. In the event, the main information channel for information on voter ID was the notice of petition which was sent to everyone who was eligible to sign.

Unlike at elections, only Electoral Commission representatives can observe all parts of the recall petition signing process during the six-week period. Electoral Commission representatives observed the petition process in signing places (including days with extended opening hours), the process for verifying the number of signing papers (which needed to be completed each day), and the final count. 

Individuals who are accredited under the Electoral Commission’s electoral observation scheme are only able to attend the final counting of signatures, while accredited organisations are not entitled to observe any stage of the process. No accredited observers attended the count. 

Limiting observation in this way helps to ensure secrecy for those signing a recall petition, and also prevents others from estimating whether the 10% threshold has been reached before the end of the petition period. However, it does also mean that transparency and scrutiny of the signing process are limited. We recommend that the UK Government review the scope of who can observe the process in signing places and the count to extend transparency and scrutiny, while ensuring that secrecy is maintained for people signing the petition.

The secrecy requirements at a recall petition continue to raise concerns amongst campaigners and the public

At a recall petition it is forbidden to publish a statement that could indicate if an individual has signed the petition or not. It also prohibits publication of any forecasts on the result of the petition until the end of the signing period.

As previously highlighted in our report on the 2018 North Antrim recall petition, this provision continues to cause concern and confusion among campaigners, the media and the public. As currently drafted it appears that anyone who makes any statement on turnout or about individuals who sign the petition could be guilty of an offence potentially punishable by a fine or imprisonment of up to six months. 

At an election, strict rules are in place to prevent the communication of any information from a polling station to indicate how someone has voted but this does not prevent voters, including postal voters, from indicating how they themselves have voted. At this recall petition a number of campaigners and members of the public sought guidance from the Commission about what activities could be included in this prohibition. The lack of a clear definition in the law gave rise to concerns that people were unable to participate in democratic debate around the recall petition for fear of breaching the secrecy rules.

We continue to recommend that the UK Government review the legislation to provide more clarity on this provision ahead of any future recall petitions.

Limited availability of signing places could compromise the secrecy of signing

Due to the challenges of securing signing places for six weeks, some of the venues in use at this recall petition were located in the foyers of leisure centres. As noted above, unlike at an election where someone completing a ballot paper may be voting for any of the candidates standing, at a recall petition the individual’s intention is clear to any passer by . 

We continue to recommend that the UK Government consider whether everyone eligible to sign should be offered the opportunity to complete an equivalent to the signing sheet to indicate that they oppose the petition. This would enhance the secrecy provisions given that it would not be evident to any observer whether an individual was supporting or opposing the petition.

Our observations and feedback from those involved in either administering or campaigning at the recall petition suggest that it was well run and people had confidence in the process.

However, concerns continue to be raised  by administrators and campaigners about the clarity of the legislation and the compatibility of election processes with a recall petition.

Clearer legislation would reduce the risk of challenge to Petition Officers

As we have previously highlighted, the Recall of MPs Act 2015 lacks clarity as to the processes in place at the end of the recall petition. Specifically, it does not set out:

• what time signing places should close on the final day
• the deadline for receipt of postal signing papers, or
• the timings for the count (other than it should take place as soon as practicable after the end of the signing period, and no later than one day after)

In 2019, we recommended that the UK Government amend the legislation to provide clarity for POs on the specific deadlines. The UK Government responded to our recommendation in September 2020 by issuing Guidance for Petition Officers: Recall of MPs Act. This guidance provides discretion to the POs in setting the deadlines.

In Rutherglen and Hamilton West, the PO set a deadline of 5pm on the last day of the signing period for the receipt of postal signing packs as this aligned with the time that signing stations closed. However, the PO was concerned that any postal signing packs received between 5pm and midnight which were not included in the count could give rise to legal challenge. In the event, no signing packs were returned within that seven hour period.

We continue to recommend that UK Government revise the legislation to ensure that a deadline for receipt of postal signing packs is clearly specified, as is the case at all other statutory elections. 

Electoral Management Software is not set up for recall petitions 

ERO staff have highlighted the challenges they faced in using their election management software (EMS) for the recall petition. 

Effective operation of EMS systems underpins the successful delivery of every poll by producing the right list of eligible voters and providing template notices which can be issued to relevant voters. ERO staff reported both a lack of template notices within their system and difficulties related to the fact that they had a local government by-election which overlapped with the recall period. 

This risked confusion between the lists of eligible electors, where the cut off for registration applications differed between the live electoral processes. This led them to run the whole recall process in a beta version of their system to ensure there could be no confusion between the two events and to dedicate teams of staff to work on both processes separately.

Returning Officers should encourage their EMS suppliers to ensure that their systems are further developed to support the effective operation of multiple events, including recall petitions, with different timetables and rules.   

Two campaigners registered with the Petition Officer 

At elections and referendums, the Electoral Commission is responsible for registering political parties and non-party campaigners wishing to spend over a certain amount. At recall petitions the registration of campaigners is undertaken by POs. 

People or organisations wishing to campaign for or against the recall petition, and intending to spend over £500, must notify the PO that they want to be a registered campaigner. POs must also receive donation and spending returns from registered campaigners within 30 days of the end of the regulated period of the recall petition. 

Two organisations registered as campaigners at the petition. They were the Labour Party  and the Scottish National Party.  They submitted donation and spending returns to the PO after the petitions. Neither campaigner reported any donations.

The total amount of spending reported by the two registered campaigners at the recall petition was £9,156.

While these spending returns are made available for public inspection by the PO and copies sent to the Commission, there is no provision for returns to be scrutinised by a statutory agency  . This differs from the Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act (PPERA) rules for elections and referendums, where it is required for the Commission to receive spending returns from political parties and campaigners so we can check that these comply with the law. However, the Recall Act appears to have been based on the Representation of the People Act (RPA) requirements for candidates at UKPGE who are required to send their spending returns to the RO and not directly to us.

The lack of statutory scrutiny of donation and spending returns means that there could be significant spending on activity intended to influence people at future recall petitions that is not fully monitored to check that campaigners have complied with the law. 

We continue to recommend that the UK Government should keep the rules for donations and spending by campaigners under review as more experience is gained at future recall petitions, to ensure there is appropriate oversight and regulation of campaigner spending.

The count was well run but consideration should be given to the transparency of the process in the event that campaigners are invited to attend

The count for the recall petition commenced at 3pm on Tuesday 1 August.

The only people who are entitled in law to attend the counting of signing sheets are the Petition Officer and their staff and any representatives of the Electoral Commission or an individual observer accredited  by the Electoral Commission. This is to ensure that there is an appropriate balance between transparency and the confidentiality of the process. Four members of Electoral Commission staff observed the proceedings. There were no accredited observers.

The Petition Officer may also invite guests to attend. In Rutherglen and Hamilton West, the PO chose to invite representatives of both the registered campaigners and the MP who was the subject of the petition, along with representatives of the political groups represented in the council, to give assurance as to the efficiency and accuracy of the process.

This was the first time that a PO has invited guests to observe the count.  
Our observations were that the count was well-run. However, representatives of the registered campaigners did raise concerns about how much of the process they were able to closely scrutinise, including the adjudication of counting sheets, due to the distance between the boundary ropes and the tables where adjudication and counting were taking place. Electoral Commission staff were able to inspect all of these areas at close proximity and were satisfied with the process.

While candidates and parties contesting an election are entitled in law to appoint counting agents to scrutinise the process closely, where they are invited as guests at a recall petition count, there is no specific requirement in law for them to be able to see all parts of the process. 

Where Petition Officers choose to invite registered campaigners to attend the counting of petition signing sheets, they should consider the layout of the count to ensure that there is transparency of the process, while also maintaining the secrecy requirements.

Why did the petition take place?

The Recall of MPs Act 2015 introduced a process where a sitting MP can lose their seat in the House of Commons if there is a successful petition to recall them. All those in the relevant constituency who are eligible to vote at a UK Parliamentary election can sign. They can choose to do so in person, by post or by appointing a proxy. Over 10% must do so for the MP to be recalled. 

The process was first used in North Antrim in 2018 when a petition to recall Ian Paisley MP was unsuccessful. Two further petitions were held in 2019 in Peterborough and Brecon and Radnorshire, where both sitting MPs were recalled and by-elections were held to fill the vacant seats.

The petition in the Rutherglen and Hamilton West constituency was the first to take place in Scotland, and the first recall petition to take place following the introduction of the requirement to show photographic ID when signing a petition in person at a signing place.

It followed a vote in the UK Parliament to suspend Margaret Ferrier from the House of Commons for 30 sitting days for breaching the Code of Conduct for Members. This automatically triggered a recall petition.

The Speaker of the House of Commons gave notice on 6 June to the Returning Officer in South Lanarkshire that a recall petition was to take place. The petition took place between 20 June and 31 July.

Roles and responsibilities

The constituency’s Returning Officer, acting in the role of Petition Officer, is responsible for opening and running a recall petition. Their role includes setting the opening date of the petition, which must be no later than 10 days, or as soon as reasonably practicable, after the notification from the Speaker of the House of Commons. They must also publish a register of people eligible to sign the petition and notify them that the petition is taking place. 

A total of 81,124 people in Rutherglen and Hamilton West were able to sign the petition. Eligible signers were notified by letter why the petition was taking place, what the outcome would be, how they could sign and information about their allocated signing place. 

During a recall petition, local police forces have a role investigating any breaches of the rules set out in the Recall Act and to enforce compliance with the law. The Commission is required to publish a report following a petition and to provide advice and guidance to help people to understand the rules. We can also seek forfeiture of impermissible donations, if necessary, by court order.