Report on the May 2021 elections in Wales

Across Wales, measures were in place to make sure that voting at polling stations was as safe possible during the pandemic. 
To support and advise on what changes should be made to voting in polling stations, the Electoral Commission worked with public health experts across the UK to provide guidance for electoral administrators. The Wales Electoral Coordination Board also worked closely with the AEA Wales to set out a minimum safety standard which constituency Returning Officers should put in place at polling stations.

The Commission also provided resources to local authorities designed to reassure voters that polling stations would be safe places to vote, including highlighting the other ways to vote, for those vulnerable or concerned and encouraging voters to start thinking about their preferred voting option early.
Resources included material for use on social media, animated videos, posters and template press releases. 
 

Almost all of the respondents to our research who voted in person said that they felt safe at a polling station with the provisions in place:

• 95% of electors who voted in person say that they felt safe at a polling station with Covid-19 safety provisions in place – with almost two thirds feeling very safe. Only a very small proportion of voters said that they felt unsafe 
• nearly three-quarters of electors aged 35-54 and 55+ felt it was very safe compared to just over half (57%) of those aged 16-34
• almost all (99%) polling station voters said that they noticed at least one of the various safety provisions that had been put in place

 Polling station staff also felt that polling stations were safe places to work (90% of staff responding to our survey agreed) and that the safety of voters was adequately provided for by the changes introduced (91%).

Candidates were also satisfied with Covid-19 safety measures in polling places, with three-quarters saying they were fairly or very satisfied. 

The new safety measures, including the limits on the number of people who could enter the polling station, meant that voting took longer for some people. The combination of polls, where voters had more than one ballot paper to complete, may also have contributed to this. Our research showed that: 

• half of those people questioned said that voting in these elections took about the same time as usual despite the Covid-19 safety provisions being in place. However, 42% said it took longer
• 48% of electors who voted in person said they waited less than five minutes, 34% waited five to 10 minutes and 16% said they waited more than 10 minutes before they were able to vote

There were reports in the media on polling day of queues at certain polling stations and instances where voters felt unable to cast their vote as a result. 

To better understand the situation across Wales, we asked Returning Officers and electoral administrators to provide detail on the voter experience in their areas. All authorities responded and 10 reported receiving some complaints about queuing including: 

• a small number (21) of people across Wales complained about being disenfranchised (11 in one authority area)
• the last polling stations to close were in Cardiff at 23:40, in Rhondda Cynon Taf at 23:20, and Newport at 00:45
• the reasons cited for why queues formed were: adhering to Covid-19 guidance, and less availability of suitable buildings for use as polling station because of requirements relating to the pandemic

This showed that while there were instances of queuing, it was not perceived by voters as a widespread problem in Wales. Generally, voters understood that Covid-19 procedures were being followed, and in most instances people were prepared to queue. 

Electors appreciated the steps being taken to ensure their safety.

Returning Officers felt that having polling station ‘marshals’ or ‘greeters’ worked well, and that these staff were able to direct and help voters, making the experience more ‘welcoming’, particularly for young and new voters. The Wales Electoral Coordination Board have concluded that this arrangement should be continued at future polls, resource permitting.

At these elections we saw a small increase in the proportion of voters choosing to vote by post, but the number of proxy voters remained at the same level: 

Of those who were first-time postal voters, half said they voted this way because of Covid-19 safety concerns, while 25% say it is more convenient. A third of electors who voted by post did so for the first time.

An overwhelming majority (96%) said that it was easy to understand what to do in order to return their postal vote. 
First time voters (15%) and those aged 16-34 (14%) were more likely to say it was difficult. The most common reasons for saying it was difficult were receiving more ballot papers than they were expecting, not being clear which envelopes they should return the completed ballot(s) in and not being clear on what information they had to provide.

When a postal ballot pack is returned to the Returning Officer, the signature and date of birth (known as the personal identifiers) provided on the postal vote statement (PVS) are checked against those previously provided by the elector. Where either or both the signature and date of birth are missing or do not match, the postal vote is rejected and is not included in the count. This is a security measure to ensure that the ballot paper has been returned by the elector it was sent to.

Data from electoral administrators shows that 13,695 (3.9%) of returned postal votes were not included in the count after the required checks on voters’ personal identifiers. The rate of rejection is slightly higher than at the 2016 Senedd election where 9,291 (3.24%) postal votes were rejected as invalid.

The most common reasons for rejection were mismatched identifiers (signature/date of birth), these account for 46% of rejections. 

Postal vote rejection rates

While the percentage of postal votes not included in the count is relatively small, it remains a matter of concern that some postal votes are not counted because voters do not complete the PVS correctly. 

The Electoral Commission will continue to work with Returning Officers and Electoral Registration Officers to support voter understanding of how to complete and return their postal ballot pack correctly. The postal vote stationery used plays an important role in aiding voter understanding with the application and voting process, and they should continue to review the information they provide to make sure it is as clear and helpful as it can be to voters. 
 

Voters whose situation changes close to an election due to work or disability can appoint an emergency proxy up to 5pm on polling day to vote on their behalf. Changes to these rules in March 2021 gave voters the option to apply for an emergency proxy if they tested positive for Covid-19 close to polling day, or had to self-isolate due to someone close to them testing positive. 

Of all proxies appointed, 5% were emergency proxies and 2% were due to Covid-19.
 

In the run up to the election we ran a new voter registration campaign targeted at the newly enfranchised, titled ‘Welcome to your vote’. This ran alongside our ‘Got 5?’ registration campaign, which targeted the whole of the electorate in Wales, but was more heavily weighted towards known under-registered audiences, such as private renters and those under 35. 

Alongside the campaigns, we sent a voter information booklet to all households in Wales containing key election messages including how to register, how to vote by post or proxy and what to expect when voting at a polling station. Earned press and media activity also helped us to spread these messages. 

During the campaign period a total of 71,562 people in Wales applied to register to vote, including 7,704 16-17 year olds and 935 qualifying foreign citizens. The foreign nationalities with the most applications were USA, Syria, China and Turkey. 

We also supplemented our campaigns with partnership work to fully explain the complexities of the election to new voters, and other groups who are typically under-registered or disengaged. We worked with local authorities and 33 different third sector and democratic organisations on a number of initiatives. These included the provision of bespoke resources and ‘train the trainer’ sessions, and working with the Senedd Commission on joint activities for 16-17 year old voters during ‘Welcome to your Vote Week’. 

A sub-group of the Wales Electoral Coordination Board was also established to specifically look at communication with these new audiences. This group will continue to operate moving forward towards next year’s local government elections in Wales.

Our research found that the majority of people were satisfied with the processes of registering to vote and voting. However, first time voters were more likely to say they were dissatisfied with the process of voting (10% compared to 3% of repeat voters) and were significantly more likely to find the multiple electoral systems confusing compared to repeat voters (55% compared to 22%). First time voters were also less likely than repeat voters to say that it was easy to get information on how to register (82% compared to 94%) and cast their vote (75% compared to 88%).

Approximately 50% (32,121, of an estimated 70,000) of eligible newly enfranchised 16-17 year olds registered to vote in this election. There is insufficient data available to enable us to report on qualifying foreign nationals.
 

Last year the Commission published a new set of online resources to educate young people about the democratic process. The resources aimed to support young people, including those who were voting for the first time at the Senedd elections, and prepare educators to teach political literacy with confidence. We worked with our partners to promote and gain feedback on the resources, which were also published on the Hwb platform alongside resources from the Welsh Government and Senedd Commission.

Covid-19 did impact both schools and colleges in being able to deliver political literacy training to students ahead of the Senedd elections in May.

We plan to extend the reach and impact of our education programme ahead of the local government elections in 2022 and Senedd election in 2026. We want to build on the work already achieved by engaging further with young people and educators across Wales to identify more themes and topics our resources can address. 

We will work with all relevant partners in Wales, including the Welsh Government and Senedd Commission, to ensure that the Commission’s focus in this area is appropriate and effective. This could mean not only enhancing existing resources but also developing support programmes for those working with these groups as well as expanding networks with the groups themselves. 
 

Given the changing context of the pandemic, it was understandably more difficult for Welsh Government to ensure changes to legislation were in place at least six-months before campaigners or electoral administrators needed to comply with them. However some changes to help the nomination process were made very close to when they would affect campaigners, and this added to the uncertainty and risk for candidates and electoral administrators.

Just over half of the candidates who responded to our survey (56%) agreed that they were well informed about legislative changes made as a result of the pandemic, however a sizeable minority (24%) disagreed. 
 

Under the public health restrictions during the campaign period, leafletting activities could not begin in Wales until 15 March 2021. Prior to this date, campaigning took place primarily online. Door-to-door canvassing was only a permitted campaign activity in Wales after 12 April and campaigners had to follow specific Covid-19 guidelines.

Some changes to campaign-related rules came after the start of the regulated period, particularly the updates to Covid-19 restrictions for campaigning. Four in five (79%) candidates who responded to our survey said their concerns about the restrictions placed on campaigning impacted their campaign ‘a lot’. Only 3% said it had no impact.

It was very difficult to run a campaign. I had a lot of anxiety because of the uncertainty.

We published guidance to support candidates and agents in these Covid-19 safe elections, informed by the latest expert advice from public health bodies. Of those who used it, 73% found the guidance clear and helpful.

From December 2020, and on a rolling basis after each three week review by the First Minister, we also circulated to political parties the latest guidance from Welsh Government that reflected changes to methods of campaigning allowed under the ‘stay local’ and social distancing Covid-19 rules.
 

Despite the initial restrictions on in-person campaign activities in early 2021, people continued to receive information about candidates and parties at the elections from a range of different sources, and in a variety of formats. The most common ways voters reported seeing information on parties and candidates are shown in the following table:

After the elections, we surveyed candidates about their campaigning activities. Some candidates told us that digital campaigning was particularly important during early 2021, when in-person activities were less manageable and they were unsure how voters would react to door-knocking and face-to-face campaigning. However, other candidates told us that relying on social media to campaign as a result of the pandemic restricted opportunities to get their views across to voters:

Fewer hustings events with all candidates, and being mostly restricted to broadcasting our messages meant that there was little opportunity to listen to voters rather than just tell them what we think.

Digital campaigning was an important activity for some candidates who responded to our survey. One in 10 (12%) estimated that over 75% of their campaign was digital activity, and 15% said digital made up 51-75% of their campaign.

However, the largest segment of candidates who responded said that digital activity was not such an important part of their campaign: two-fifths of candidates (40%) said it made up less than 25% of their campaign and nearly a quarter (23%) estimated it was between 25-50% of their campaigning activity. 

Candidates told us they used more unpaid social media messaging on various platforms compared to paid-for adverts. Two-thirds (68%) of candidates who responded put posts about their campaign on social media and over half (53%) asked supporters to share their posts. Other popular methods were uploading videos to social media (44%), and emailing supporters (38%). Paying for ads on social media was the most popular method of paid digital campaigning (32%).

Although campaigners used a variety of methods to put their message to voters prior to the election, our research shows that 57% of people responded saying that they had enough information to make an informed decision, which is down from 75% in 2016.
 

Over half (55%) of candidates who responded to our survey said that they were unable to campaign effectively due to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. A third (32%) said they were able to campaign ‘fairly effectively’ and only 5% said they could do so ‘very effectively’.

The biggest impact on campaigning due to Covid-19 related to the opportunities for face-to-face campaigning. Almost nine in 10 (87%) said concerns about face-to-face campaigning impacted their campaign ‘a lot’.

The election should have been deferred. We were not permitted to leaflet until far too late. By the time we were permitted to canvass it wasn't a viable option as my campaign team was me. Every door knocked takes ten to twenty times as long as leafleting. I believe that failing to defer the election has benefited incumbent candidates and hamstrung the rest of us.

We were unable to do full door to door canvassing because of time constraint/ limited number of volunteers due to anxieties regarding Covid-19.
 

During the last 10 years, digital campaigning has become commonplace, and voters are now subjected to many political adverts on social media and via other methods online. Digital campaigning accounts for an increasingly large proportion of spending reported by campaigners after elections. 

An imprint on printed material, which includes details showing who has produced and paid for the material, is a legal requirement. We have long recommended that digital campaigning could be further improved for voters if the imprint rules were extended to cover all material from campaigners. This would help improve public trust and confidence in digital campaigns. 

Our research after the election confirmed that people continue to value transparency about who is responsible for political campaign activity online at elections with:

• a majority (69%) of people agreeing that it is important for them to know who has produced the political information they see online 
• three in five agree (59%) they would trust digital campaigning material more if they knew who produced it

At the 2021 Scottish Parliament elections, the requirement for imprints on digital campaign material was introduced for the first time in any election in the UK. The UK Government has also published a Bill that would introduce digital imprint rules for both UK Parliamentary general elections, and Police and Crime Commissioner elections taking place in Wales.

The publication of notice of election took place a week earlier than usual to allow for a longer period of time for candidates and parties to submit their nomination forms. Extended hours for submission were also introduced to help with the process of informally checking nomination forms and then formally submitting the paperwork.

While completed nomination forms were still required to be submitted by hand, electoral administrators made changes to their processes to minimise the risk to those involved:

• a legislative change was made to allow the consent to nomination form to be signed and submitted electronically instead of by hand
• informal checking of nomination forms prior to submission was offered more frequently using email
• arrangements for safe hand delivery of nomination forms ensuring social distancing measures were in place
• candidate and agent briefing sessions were generally held via video conferencing

Of the candidates who responded to our election survey, nine in 10 (90%) agreed that the nomination process was well run. Nearly three in five (58%) agreed that longer hours for delivery of nomination forms was useful. Four in five (80%) agreed that the electronic submission of consent forms was useful.

Feedback from stakeholder groups in Wales was that digitisation worked well at these elections, improving the nomination process through online checks and increasing attendance by moving briefing sessions online. Embedding these changes for future elections has the potential to benefit both candidates and electoral administrators, as would further consideration of how electronic methods could improve the nomination process.

Under electoral legislation, the Commission can prepare guidance on what is, and is not, included in the categories of campaign spending that appear on the spending returns for parties and candidates. For the Senedd elections, the Commission developed statutory codes of practice on election spending for both candidates and political parties taking part in the Senedd elections. The codes are the first statutory codes of their kind in the UK. 

The codes help parties, candidates and agents meet their legal obligations and improve transparency for voters.
The codes provide:

• clarity on campaign spending
• how this campaign activity should be reported
• whether the spending should appear in a candidate or party spending return
• give people confidence that election spending is reported correctly
• Of those who used them, two-thirds (66%) found the Commission’s codes of practice clear and helpful.
   

The elections that were postponed from May 2020 meant that the Senedd and Police and Crime Commissioner elections were combined across Wales. The establishment of the First Minister’s Elections Planning Group in June 2020 provided a useful forum for discussion and early decision making. The group, which brought together political parties, Regional Returning Officers (RROs), Welsh and UK Government officials, the AEA and the Commission met regularly to consider the required changes to legislation to maximise democratic participation whilst also protecting public health. 

Welsh Government also established a Senedd Elections Operations Group which again provided a high level forum to discuss the management and operation of the elections during the pre-election period. 
 

The Wales Electoral Coordination Board was established in 2017.The Board co-ordinates the planning for all Wales electoral events, as well as activity related to electoral modernisation and reform, and helps collaboration between Regional and Local Returning Officers, Electoral Registration Officers and key partners in Wales.

The Board played a significant and important role in the planning and preparation for these elections, and in ensuring that the safety requirements could be effectively and consistently delivered across Wales. The Board was represented on the First Minister’s Elections Planning Group and participated in the Senedd Elections Operations Group, providing a link between government and Returning Officers throughout the extended pre-election period.

Key examples of the importance of this group included:

• The introduction of minimum safety requirements for polling stations and the count agreed through effective joint working between the Wales Electoral Coordination Board and AEA Wales
• advice given to Ministers and Welsh Government officials about proposed changes to the rules, including those aiming to ensure the elections were Covid-secure
• agreement on daytime counting across Wales
• the colour of the ballot papers

We recommended in our May 2017 report on the local government elections that Welsh Government should consider how the role of the Board could be developed to support Welsh Government’s overarching electoral modernisation programme. We also recommended that the Government give consideration to the Board becoming a statutory group, as is the case in Scotland.

Four years on, this recommendation is now even more relevant, given that Welsh Government is responsible for legislating for elections in Wales and intends to bring forward a range electoral reforms in the coming years.
 

Electoral administrators’ ability to plan and deliver their work for these elections was impacted by Covid-19 restrictions in the months leading up to them:

• 88% said that the Covid-19 restrictions had made their job more difficult, with 75% of respondents saying that their workload had increased because of the Covid-19 restrictions during the elections
• 63% said that they were concerned for their own health because of Covid-19

Some electoral administrators told us they had seen a significant impact on the capacity and wellbeing of their teams. Others told us that delivering the election had left them feeling totally overwhelmed and that they felt they had no choice but to put their work life before their family life. Support that would have been relied on at previous election from other parts of the local authority was unavailable due to Covid-19.

…well-run elections come at a cost and I think you will see a lot of elections officers leaving this role because we are worried about our health.

Administrators also highlighted the difficulty they had finding suitable venues to use as polling stations. Covid-19 restrictions meant it was harder to contact people to make bookings, and in some venues there were issues with the facilities as they had been shut down for long periods in advance due to lockdowns.

Temporary porta cabins were also difficult to secure as many were being used as vaccination centres.

Lots of polling stations had been shut up in the last year – we had to carry out six chlorination processes as they had not checked water – all this had to be checked out. 
 

The complexity of these elections and the extra requirements that were needed in terms of Covid-19 restrictions placed added pressure on Returning Officers and electoral teams during the pre-election period and on polling day and throughout the counts. 

76% of those who responded to our survey said they had difficulty recruiting polling station staff. Concerns were also expressed about the reduction in the number of experienced Presiding Officers and it was noted that poll clerks with several years’ experience were reluctant to step-up.
 

Welsh Government also considered introducing significant electoral reform for the Senedd elections in the final months before the poll. Potential changes included the introduction of early voting centres, and changes to the postal voting statement.

Neither of these options were in the end introduced for May 2021, but the discussions around these proposals resulted in confusion and introduced uncertainty and speculation during the election planning process, in what was already a highly pressured environment. 

This approach must be avoided for future national elections, and the agreed six month principle should continue to be applied when developing any new legislation. Early clarity of legislation, together with good communication and engagement, supports the effective preparation and the delivery of well-run polls. It also ensures that guidance and resources can be made available to electoral administrators and candidates and agents well in advance of the elections, and that complex planning is not disrupted by unforeseen change. It will also support the provision of early, clear information to voters, to help them understand what to expect and how they can take part in the elections.

We call on Welsh Government to ensure that any legislation related to electoral reform or changes to the voting process is in place six months before the election and that Ministerial intent should be shared with the electoral community well before this time. 

A national consensus on the timing of the count was reached by the Wales Electoral Coordination Board in early January resulting in a decision that the Senedd election count should take place the day after polling day and not overnight. This was necessary as the verification and count processes would require more staff and take longer to perform because of Covid-19 restrictions. 

Whilst there was positive feedback from Returning Officers and electoral administrators on the approach to the timing of the count, we did gather some feedback from the political parties that suggested there were some reservations about adopting this approach at all future Welsh elections. Some political parties suggested that elections taking place outside of a pandemic situation should revert back to overnight counts rather than counting the next day, as candidates would prefer to know the outcome of the election as soon as possible. Also, there was a concern that not enough counting agents would be available to scrutinise the verification and count processes efficiently if polling day and the count were carried out across multiple days.

The Wales Electoral Coordination Board should carefully consider all views, including those of political parties and candidates, ahead of any decision on timing for the 2026 elections.
 

In the North Wales region there was a local printing error which led to the name of an independent candidate not being included on the regional ballot paper issued in two North Wales constituencies. The error affected ballot papers issued both by post and at polling stations. It was detected during the second hour of polling and immediate action was taken to address the problem. 

While recognising the pressures faced by Returning Officers and their teams and the challenging circumstances of the elections, it is important that voters, candidates and political parties can have confidence in the election process and that the ballot papers they receive are accurate. 

After the polls, we considered the issue in line with our performance standards for Returning Officers and concluded that in both cases the Returning Officers did not fully meet those standards1 .  Both Returning Officers have agreed to surrender a part of the fee they receive for carrying out their role.

Further work is also being undertaken by the Wales Electoral Coordination Board to develop a protocol and guidance to assist Returning Officers when ballot paper proofing in future elections. 

Positive feedback has been received from candidates and agents regarding the arrangements that were put in place to ensure the integrity of the elections but also to keep all present as safe as possible. 

However, while the majority of candidates were confident that the elections were well run, fewer were satisfied with their ability to observe and scrutinise the count. 

Whilst 72% of candidates agreed that election staff made it clear what was happening throughout the count process and 75% agreed that the delayed/daytime count was acceptable for Covid-19 safety, only half (51%) agreed that it was possible to observe and scrutinise the count effectively, and over a third (38%) disagreed.

Some parties have reported that due to the Covid-19 safety provisions in place at count venues, they were not permitted to appoint as many counting agents as they considered were needed to enable full scrutiny, and that layouts at some of the count centres were not clear and impeded proper observation of the verification and count processes. 

Positive work was delivered nationally and locally through good dialogue between the political parties and election managers and, whilst not always what we would expect in normal times, the arrangements were broadly effective in ensuring transparency in the circumstances.

Regular and effective communication between Returning Officers and political parties and candidates through established forums such as the Wales Electoral Coordination Board should continue to ensure that any concerns of parties and candidates can be properly considered and acted upon.