The SVDO process requires a referendum administered by the local authority. The process for the referendum has not been fully set out in the proposal and we believe that the Government may have underestimated the complexity of the proposal and the implications of this new requirement on councils. There are some key areas where we have concerns, both about the practical administration of the referendums and about the fairness of the process.
The current proposal sets out two groups of voters who are eligible to vote under different franchise rules. For residents, they must be registered to vote on the local register on the date the proposal is submitted to the Inspectorate; non-domestic ratepayers must be eligible to vote in UK Parliamentary elections. This creates two disparities. First, some individuals, such as EU citizens with retained voting rights, will be able to vote as a resident but not as a ratepayer. Second, residents not on the electoral register at the point the proposal is submitted for examination will be shut out of voting on the proposal, while ratepayers will have time to register to vote after the referendum is called. We believe that the franchises should be similar and that both residents and ratepayers should have the chance to register to vote after the referendum is called and up until a similar deadline. We propose the Government consider mirroring arrangements for similar polls, such as Business Neighbourhood Planning Referendums, to ensure arrangements are not preferential to one group or another.
The proposed turnout rate of 60 per cent of the eligible electorate is very high and we would question whether this is realistically achievable. Average turnout for local elections is around 30 per cent for scheduled elections; turnouts for local referendums may be even lower. Additionally, we would suggest that the proposal that at least one voter in at least half of the voting households in the street area votes in favour is unworkable because it would require administrators to open and assess all votes. This goes against the presumed secrecy of the ballot, which is a key tenet of our electoral system and might discourage people from voting the way they wish to or at all.
On this point of integrity, it is unclear from this proposal how other rules around campaigning, spending and undue influence would apply to these polls. Clarity on this in relation to SVDOs will be critical in ensuring that these referendums are fair, transparent and protected from inappropriate influence.
In relation to the administration of the polls, there are several key issues to consider. First is the practicality of postal-only ballots. Approximately one in five registered voters are postal voters. However, every other voter would need to apply for a postal vote and provide specific information to confirm their identity and for the purpose of verification that the ballot has been completed by the voter, including date of birth and signature. This is a significant process which would need to be completed before the postal ballots were issued.
Second, local authorities currently do not have the authority to share the register of electors with the Planning Inspectorate as they are not a relevant organisation under Regulation 113 of the Representation of the People Regulations 2001. In addition, under the current legislation, local authorities can only use the electoral register for specific purposes, which do not include the validation of proposals, as this is not a statutory function of the council. Legislation would be required to enable these checks.
Finally, the proposal does not deal with several practicalities, including timescales, protections to business-as-usual activities such as avoiding combination with other polls, clarity about how these referendums would be funded and resourced and where the street crossed over two local authority areas. These issues would need to be clarified in some detail. Again, it may be helpful for the Department to consider other similar polls such as neighbourhood planning referendums with a business element for which the timetable is 84 statutory days. Less than this would be unworkable.