Related Articles
An independent review into postal issues that put thousands at risk of not being able to vote in the general election found the “error does not require formal assessment” – it has been revealed. In May, thousands of postal votes in North West Essex were delayed due to “human error” at Uttlesford Council, leaving voters fuming. A total of 2,644 postal votes in the Uttlesford and Chelmsford area were sent out late, with the council boss saying he was mortified and prepared to consider his position over the issue – at the time.
Following the election, anger from residents led to the council leader, Petrina Lees, drafting Peter Stanyon, chief executive of the Association of Electoral Administrators, to carry out an independent expert review of what happened, and to make recommendations for the future. A meeting of the council’s audit and standards committee on September 26 will be briefed on how the review found the council dealt with things correctly and that the “response is commendable.” The review also made a number of recommendations following the issues and concerns.
The delay in postal votes arriving could mean some people are unable to vote due to the timing of their summer trips away. Voters were left “really angry” and slammed the issues as “disgusting” adding that “we are having democracy eroded, it is our right to vote.”
Read more: The beautifully secluded Essex road where the average home sells for over £2m
Read more: Plans to turn Chelmsford car park into blocks of flats
The review report, which has been published on the council’s website with documents for the meeting, says: “Basic checks were not carried out and communication between the area returning officer’s team and the print supplier was weak.” It later adds: “In summary, once the error was identified, the response was commendable: The steps taken will have ensured the vast majority of voters were able to participate in the election, The communications response is good, The outcome of the election is not open to question.”
A number of recommendations were made by the independent reviewer including an internal review being carried out, combining data for Uttlesford and Chelmsford to prevent voters or homes being omitted, working to track the postal vote with Royal Mail, on site proof checking of postal voting stationery at printer supplies offices, bringing in a Chelmsford ballot station for the constituency vote and others.
