Postal vote fraud fears rise

Fears of electoral vote fraud escalated today after an astonishing leap in the number of Londoners apparently voting by post.

A record one in five London electors have applied for postal votes, according to an Evening Standard survey.

The number is three times bigger than in 2001 — and includes an incredible 40-times increase in one of the capital’s inner-city boroughs.

The findings, which will fuel suspicions of organised fraud, come a week after an Evening Standard investigation disclosed how easy it is to obtain other people’s ballot papers by cheating.

Half a million Londoners are due to cast a postal vote, according to the survey of the 33 boroughs.

Hackney tops the league table of increases, with the council having issued 37,285 postal votes for its two constituencies — up 4,000 per cent. The borough has seen demand soar as a result of its 2002 council elections being conducted exclusively by postal voting in a government pilot scheme.

Barnet is second highest with 32,501. The average number of postal votes per borough is 16,862.

The figures emerged a week after the Standard revealed how the election is open to vote-rigging. A number of postal ballots for constituencies across London were obtained by a reporter without any apparent checks for fraud.

Last year’s local elections in Birmingham led to the sacking of six Labour councillors for postal fraud. The elections commissioner said the system “would disgrace a banana republic”.

Hackney South and Shoreditch, a safe Labour seat, will have the highest
umber of postal votes in the capital, with 19,456 issued.

Hackney North is second with 17,829. Third is the Lib-Dem marginal seat of Richmond Park.

Elsewhere, 6,600 postal votes have been issued in Bethnal Green and Bow, which is being contested by Oona King and George Galloway. There were about 3,500 postal votes issued in Brent East, where Lib-Dem Sarah

Teather beat Labour in a 2003 by-election. A Hackney council spokeswoman said all postal votes were being hand-delivered by council staff and attention was paid to any instances where large numbers of votes were supplied to a single address, to counter possible fraud.

Across Britain, about six million people have asked for a postal vote following a rule change that removed the need to explain the reason for such a request.

International observers from the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights have been called in, although they cannot enter polling stations.

The Electoral Commission, a watchdog set up by Parliament, and the Electoral Reform Society have concerns about the lack of safeguards.

They believe people applying to be registered on the electoral roll should supply their signature and date of birth to check against subsequent applications for postal votes.

Alex Folkes, of the Electoral Reform Society, said: “Any time you take ballot papers out of the direct control of the returning officer there is an increased risk of fraud. It could be they get stolen or fall into the wrong hands. It could be that somebody is pressurised into voting a certain way, or it could be there are fictitious electors that never existed in the first place.

“We don’t think postal voting is a bad thing. We just need to put measures in place to ensure fraud doesn’t happen.”

Lord Greaves, a Lib-Dem peer, said: “It is essential the international observers are able to get into the polling stations, the election officials’ offices, the counts and have access to the politicians, to provide a rigorous check on the integrity of the electoral process.”

Many London councils attribute the dramatic increase in postal voting applications to a drive last summer to get people to register to vote in the general election. Insurers for local authorities, which are responsible for running elections fairly, fear they could be landed with huge bills for costs if ballots have to be re-run because of fraud.