Review Into Putney Election Error Blames Under Resourcing
Incorrect declaration was due to spreadsheet not being checked
Fleur Anderson gives her acceptance speech after the count. Picture: Wandsworth Council
October 2, 2024
A report into the blunder which led to an incorrect declaration of the Putney constituency result at this year’s General Election has concluded that the council needs to provide more resources at the vote count.
Even though 6,000 votes were excludedon 4 July, the error made no difference to the overall result including the relative position of the candidates but the Chief Executive of Wandsworth borough requested the review from Andrew Maughan, the Borough Solicitor for the London Borough of Camden.
He concluded that while the specific reason for the error was a spreadsheet not being set up correctly, this reflected a deeper problem.
His report states, “To say this occurred because of the spreadsheet is to miss the bigger picture. In my view, the mistake occurred because of a lack of resource being directed to the process. It failed because there was a single point of failure, and no checks or balances built in in terms of the processes prior to and then during the count. “
The person responsible for the spreadsheet, and who Mr Maughan says was the only person who could have verified the calculations, was Andrew Smith, Head of Electoral Services at Wandsworth Council. He said that in future any such calculations should be double checked by someone outside of the elections team.
Mr Smith has acknowledged the error and confirmed that he believes if he had requested more resources, they would have been provided.
The report suggests that the council should look at benchmarking with other councils the resource it provides at election time and that the final decision on the amount should be made by the Returning Officers. The council was also encouraged to involve members of its finance team in the creation and checking of spreadsheets to calculate vote share and turnover percentages.
It was also recommended that the declaration of the result should include the overall number of votes cast and counted and that figures about to be declared should be shared first with candidates and their agents.
The error was discovered 11 days after the result was declared (and the writ had been returned to Parliament) when the Labour party queried the figures. The BBC’s data analysis had shown a discrepancy in the turnout between the percentage figure given and the number of votes cast.
Mr Maughan also had criticism of the Council for its failure to promptly report the error to the media and that the communication that issued should have been as comprehensive as possible as early as possible
Mr Maughan concludes his report by saying, “It is clear – anecdotal evidence abounds – that mistakes in elections are far from uncommon. They are however usually spotted quickly and corrected, and following some temporary embarrassment, quickly forgotten. The system officers are required to apply has real benefits (for example, the visual collection and stacking of votes provides significant reassurance that elections have been fair) but it remains paper based, with extremely tight timetables, at times called at very short notice and involve some of the key decisions being made in the middle of the night. Elections are also because of legislative changes becoming increasingly complex. It is impossible therefore to eliminate error. None of my suggestions guarantee that errors will not occur, elections being run by human beings, but they do in my view make them less likely, which is the best we can hope for.”
In reporting the Independent Review to the General Purposes Committee, Wandsworth Council officers fully accepted the recommendations. Officers have acknowledged the issues that led to the error, repeated their apology for the error and re-affirmed their commitment to make the necessary changes to maintain confidence in the election process.
Mike Jackson, Chief Executive of Wandsworth Council, said, “As Acting Returning Officer, I fully accept the recommendations arising from the independent review into the Putney General Election count and acknowledge the need for improvements. While the error did not affect the overall result, it is essential we address the issues identified to ensure such mistakes do not happen again.
“Many of the recommendations from the Independent Review align with the actions we had agreed to put in place following our own review , including enhanced checks and further verification of election processes. I am confident these steps will strengthen the robustness of our future elections, and I thank everyone involved in the review for their thorough work.”
Councillor Rex Osborn, Chair of the General Purposes Committee was keen to ensure the error was thoroughly investigated and welcomed the Independent Review. Mr Maughan’s report has now been published and its recommendations will be discussed at the General Purposes Committee meeting on 4 October 2024.
Councillor Osborn said: “It is critical that we learn from what went wrong. Elections are the cornerstone of our democracy and even though every vote was properly counted, any error in reporting them can undermine public trust.
“While the overall outcome was unaffected, this should never have happened, and we are committed to learning lessons. I’m pleased that officers have accepted the outcomes of the review and apologised, and I look forward to discussing it further with the committee where I will be commending the recommendations to them”.
Like Reading Articles Like This? Help Us Produce More This site remains committed to providing local community news and public interest journalism. Articles such as the one above are integral to what we do. We aim to feature as much as possible on local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents, community-based initiatives and even helping people find missing pets. We've always done that and won't be changing, in fact we'd like to do more. However, the readership that these stories generates is often below that needed to cover the cost of producing them. Our financial resources are limited and the local media environment is intensely competitive so there is a constraint on what we can do. We are therefore asking our readers to consider offering financial support to these efforts. Any money given will help support community and public interest news and the expansion of our coverage in this area. A suggested monthly payment is £8 but we would be grateful for any amount for instance if you think this site offers the equivalent value of a subscription to a daily printed newspaper you may wish to consider £20 per month. If neither of these amounts is suitable for you then contact info@neighbournet.com and we can set up an alternative. All payments are made through a secure web site. One-off donations are also appreciated. Choose The Amount You Wish To Contribute. If you do support us in this way we'd be interested to hear what kind of articles you would like to see more of on the site – send your suggestions to the editor. For businesses we offer the chance to be a corporate sponsor of community content on the site. For £30 plus VAT per month you will be the designated sponsor of at least one article a month with your logo appearing if supplied. If there is a specific community group or initiative you'd like to support we can make sure your sponsorship is featured on related content for a one off payment of £50 plus VAT. All payments are made through a secure web site. |