BS: Secret ??? Ballots

Subject: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 03:50 AM

Coming across the thread from our US friends called The Truth About Voter ID put me in mind of what appears to me to be an anomaly in our own electoral practices here in UK.

We are always being assured that we have a 'secret ballot', while the fact of the matter is that the number of the ballot paper one receives at the poll is recorded beside one's name on the copy of the electoral register on which one is identified as eligible to vote at the polling station.

I am sure there are good reasons for this, and many safeguards in place to prevent access by unauthorised persons, and so on. But the fact remains that one's voting paper could be compared with the electoral register, and one's vote thus identified.

Whatever the reasons for this, it surely means that THE SO-CALLED 'SECRET' BALLOT IS NOTHING OF THE SORT; and that 'they' should stop telling us that that is what it is what we have got.

Any comments?

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 05:55 AM

See Here

"Some voters have complained in the past that elections in the UK are not secret because there is a number on the back of the ballot paper and also on the counterfoil of the ballot paper book the ballot paper is taken from. It is claimed that a ballot paper could be matched with the counterfoil, which records the electoral number of the voter. It is true that, in theory, votes could be traced in this way. However, in reality, there are procedures in place to ensure that this does not happen.


All procedures during an election are prescribed in law. At the close of poll, the counterfoils of the used ballot paper books are sealed in packets along with other confidential documents used by the Polling Station staff. This happens before the staff leave the polling premises. These packets may only be opened upon an Order from the High Court or the House of Lords.


At the Count, the marked ballot papers are kept face upwards so that no-one may attempt to see the number on the back of the ballot paper. At the end of the Count, the marked ballot papers are sealed in packets in a similar manner to the unused ones before they left the Polling Stations. This all takes place under the scrutiny of independent agents representing the candidates and by the Returning Officer and his staff so that no fraudulent or dishonest practice may take place.


All the documents, sealed in their separate packets, are kept securely in custody by the Returning Officer (or by the Clerk of the Crown for Parlaimentary elections) and are kept for 12 months. This is to allow time for any Court Order to be made if the conduct of the election were to be called into question. Even then, it would not necessarily mean that all packets would be opened and scrutinised. At the end of the 12 month period all the packets are destroyed.


Honest voters have nothing to fear and the ballot is secret."

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 01:25 PM

Beats the hell out of pushing a button on a machine operated by software which could have as many hidden "back doors" as the current government and its various departments need to ensure an election win.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 01:33 PM

Thank you Nigel, yes, I know about all that. But the fact remains that a ballot paper COULD be identified.

Just supposing, for the sake of argument, that the BNP took over the government in a coup-d'etat (Oh I know it couldn't happen ~~ & Hindenberg couldn't have been such an idiot to appoint one A Hitler Reichskancellor in 1933, could he ~~ that couldn't happen either!). Do you think they would honour the commitments specified above & pass up the opportunity to establish who had voted for who?

They can go on about all these statutory safeguards, seal-ups, destructtion after 12 months, need for High Court order before a seal can be broken in the interim, till they are blue in the face. But the fact remains that

for all their saying

THAT BALLOT IS NOT BLOODY WELL 'SECRET' IN ANY MEANINGFUL SENSE OF THE TERM!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 01:36 PM

Sorry if I appear to have fallen foul of Godwin's Law, which is a predicament I always strive to avoid: but the ref appears relevant to me in this instance.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 11:58 AM

"...the fact of the matter is that the number of the ballot paper one receives at the poll is recorded beside one's name on the copy of the electoral register on which one is identified as eligible to vote at the polling station." MtheGM

I am curious. Is it a fact that the ballot number is "recorded" beside the name? Is it done by hand or pre-printed?

I used to work in Elections in Alaska; in order to refresh my memory I called them yesterday and posed this same question: Since the ballot packs are numbered and since the names on the ballot register are also numbered, does that mean that each person's vote can be tracked?

Answer: No.

The ballots are numbered for quality control: to ensure that the proper amount was printed/delivered and accounted for. The numbers on the register are precinct numbers and are unrelated.

I pressed: In a corrupt regime the numbers could be correlated, right?

She hesitated. I suppose so, she said, but the numbers would have to be put in by hand; there is no way in our system that it could be done invisibly.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 12:49 PM

Yes, it is done by hand, Ebbie. As the election clerk at the polling station hands you your ballot paper, she writes its serial number next to your name on her copy of the electoral roll.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 01:02 PM

... no, sorry, that is not right. He/she writes your electoral roll number on the ballot paper's numbered counterfoil. It would be an arduous task to correlate all these numbers, and I am sure that all the safeguards and procedures rubricated in the regulations copied above by Nigel are strictly adhered to.

But the fact of the matter remains that the ballot paper & the voter who completed it COULD be correlated; which makes claims of absolute secrecy invalid. "Secret" is not a relative. Nothing can be 'a bit unique'; and, by the same token, nothing can be 'a bit secret'. "Secret" is an absolute; in the context of elections, it means that no-one should be able by any possible means to correlate a voting paper with a specific voter. Once that can be done, it ceases to be "secret", and becomes "sort of secret so long as everyone is correctly motivated and all the rules are observed":

i.e. not actually 'secret' at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 01:52 PM

So what is the ideal situation, Mike?

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 03:45 PM

A really secret ballot, Ebbie. The voter's entitlement to vote, at the polling station authorised by his residence and no other, must be carefully checked by the production of his voter's papers and ID. He must then be crossed or ticked off on the list so that he cannot come and try to vote again; then issued with a plain, unnumbered ballot paper [or if numbered for admin purposes, in no way linked in writing to him, by counterfoil or any other method]. He will then cast his vote in a private booth and put his folded paper into the ballot box.

If the vote is to be truly secret, there must be no possible or potential method of linking the ballot paper with the voter.

At present there is. It is not easy, or untroublesome ~~ but it could be done. So long as that is the case, the claim of a 'secret ballot' is unsustainable.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 04:00 PM

There is always a balance to be met. In this case control of the ballots vs "secrecy." If the election worked are crooked and there are no monitors there is no secrecy. But they are not crooked and they are monitored and probably no one is given access to the register and the ballots at the same time. Your ballots are secret enough for any reasonable, non-nitpicking person.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 04:10 AM

Wonder what Jack the Driveller imagines he knows of our electoral practices.

Can't keep his long prodnose out of anything, can he?

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 07:22 AM

A really secret ballot, Ebbie. The voter's entitlement to vote, at the polling station authorised by his residence and no other, must be carefully checked by the production of his voter's papers and ID. He must then be crossed or ticked off on the list so that he cannot come and try to vote again; then issued with a plain, unnumbered ballot paper [or if numbered for admin purposes, in no way linked in writing to him, by counterfoil or any other method]. He will then cast his vote in a private booth and put his folded paper into the ballot box.

If the vote is to be truly secret, there must be no possible or potential method of linking the ballot paper with the voter.

At present there is. It is not easy, or untroublesome ~~ but it could be done. So long as that is the case, the claim of a 'secret ballot' is unsustainable.

But the system you suggest only omits the step of numbering the ballots.
If we are going down the 'secret police' scenario then you need to ensure that voters don't leave their fingerprints on the ballots as well!

The current system works, and is about as 'secret' as we're liable to get.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 10:28 AM

Quite, Nigel. Your use of quotes round "secret" makes my point ~~ i.e. that it isn't really quite as 'secret' as those who govern us would like to boast of. Must say I think your point about fingerprints a trifle frivolous ~~ not everyone's fingerprints are on file; but everyone's electoral role number can be checked in any public library.

"But the system you suggest only omits the step of numbering the ballots," you write. Indeed ~~ but that is a pretty considerable 'only', isn't it?

I am not attacking our system. I will accept that maybe some such safeguards are in the public interest. It's just the self-righteous bragging of the much-vaunted 'secrecy' of our process, when it only so, not absolutely, but merely up to a precisely definable point, that somewhat sticks in my craw.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 11:57 AM

A hand-pencilled number inserted next to each name, in order to make it permanent has to be entered into the computer files. What is the point?

Do they want to be able to say that on such and such an issue in such and such a year, Michael voted in such and such a way?

I don't get it.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Newport Boy
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 12:20 PM

'Secret' is a much abused word, and most things described as such are 'relatively secret'. A true secret is known to only one person, not recorded externally and not disclosed to another.

The only examples I can think of are in my head, and I can't tell you those - they're secrets!

Phil

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 01:39 PM

I lived in Canada until I was 39. the system there is as described on this thread. Nigels, point is similar to mine and a very good one. It doesn't have to have to be absolutely secret. Just secret enough so that people can vote with confidence and not be bribed.

In the past, political operatives sometimes used to hang around polling stations, offer a bribe and pay off the people who voted their way. The current UK/Canada system does not allow that. It does not allow for any kind of abuse I can think of.

There are to major differences with the present US system that are very significant. The debacle in Florida, hanging chads, Bush v Gore, could not have happened. The US "voter id" laws causing so much controversy would not be necessary.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 07:41 PM

And, of course, there are places in the UK where representatives of the main parties hang about outside the polling station & ask for your name/polling number as you go in.
The list they create lets the local party activists check whether there is any large concentration of those who would be expected to vote in their favour who have not yet attended.
These 'jobsworths' (thank you Jeremy Taylor) can be easily upset.

I have been approached with the following conversation (or similar)

Attendant: What's your polling number?"
Me: Pardon?
Attendant: Can I ask you for your name, or polling number?
Me: Yes, certainly.
Attendant: What is it?
Me: I'm not saying. This is suppost to be a secret ballot!

They can get quite upset!

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 08:29 PM

The very few times I used a paper ballot, I don't believe its number WAS recorded beside my name. The only record was that I HAD gotten a ballot...not which one.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 08:50 PM

Same here, Bill D.

Subject: RE: BS: Secret ??? Ballots
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 10:28 PM

The number of the ballot paper is not recorded beside your name. Each ballot paper is numbered and taken from a pad with counterfoils. Your voter ID # is recorded on the ballot paper's counterfoil. That is invariable practice here.