Electoral Fraud

Under the Freedom of Information Act, please disclose

Full details of allegations of electoral fraud relating to the administration of the 2010 UK general election.

I would like the response to include details of the number of allegations made and the constituencies involved, the specific allegations, the status of the individuals accused of any misdemeanours – ie candidates, party officials, etc – and the result or current status of any investigations carried out as a result. 

In accordance with section 1 (1) (a) of the Act our response is provided below;

The information you have requested is information intended for future publication and therefore exempt information in accordance with section 22 (1) (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Electoral Commission have already sated their intention to publish verified findings on the 2010 election. An explanation of this has been provided below.

The Electoral Commission and the Association of Chief Police Officers undertake systematic monitoring of allegations of electoral malpractice reported to the police during the election period. Cabinet Office officials also attend meetings of relevant stake holders hosted by the Electoral Commission to discuss issues related to electoral integrity.

The Electoral Commission has indicated that it will publish the verified data arising from this process, and analysis on the extent and nature of electoral malpractice reported during 2010 (including the May UK general election), in January 2011.

Also, Lord McNally referred to the Electoral Commission's planned report on allegations of electoral malpractice at the 2010 General Election in answering oral PQs on 5 October and 1 November and we have enclosed the links below.

Parliament Publication 1

Parliament Publication 2

The Cheshire Constabulary has considered the following public interest arguments;

In favour of disclosure are the general arguments in favour of promoting transparency, accountability and participation. Disclosure might enhance the quality of discussion.

Arguments in favour of maintaining the exemption include the intentions of the body charged with monitoring the election to produce verified data for the benefit of the public at large. Early disclosure of piecemeal information may inhibit frankness and debate or focus toward peripheral issues. In all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.