Robert Curtis, (Head of Electoral Services) provided a verbal update for members on the progress and timetable of the review of polling places.

Robert explained that the predicted timetable had unfortunately slipped this due to the work associated with the potential combination of polls that could happen with the GLA and General Election in early 2024. Consequently, the review was unlikely to be completed by January 2024 as originally planned.

Robert asked members to note that technically the review didn’t have to finish until January 2025 so he recommended the Council maintained the status quo for the upcoming GLA and for the general election (if combined) and to then revisit the review once the polls for the GLA had been completed, if a standalone election and if necessary to wait until after the date of the general election whenever that would be called. If the GLA is standalone election, Robert advised it would be possible to complete the review before the general election takes place if that is called towards the end of 2024. Committee members indicated they had no major objections to the revised timetable for the review of polling places as outlined.

Robert provided an overview of activity on the review to date, noting that

• Consultation responses had been low, with only 4 responses received in the time allocated with one withdrawn and the other three responses related to relatively minor issues.
• A review on the policy of using schools as polling places was recommended despite the duty placed on schools to provide facilities but this is a cause of frequent enquiries every year.
• Comments received and observations also  indicate that Canary Wharf would benefit from a closer review of polling arrangements.

Further to questions from the Committee, Robert explained:

• that further to the low responses to the consultation, consultation methods would be revisited to ensure the consultation reached as wide an audience as possible and was accessible to residents. It was noted that 80 disabled organisations in the borough were contacted directly but no responses were received.
• anecdotal evidence suggests that the lack of responses could reflect that most voters are happy with current arrangements.
• an update on the preparation for voter ID, including the numbers of applications for voter authority certificates. It was anticipated that applications for these, as with absent voter applications, will increase significantly when the General Election is announced. Preparations continue in preparation of these significant changes.
• that the borough would, from the next General Election, have3 parliamentary constituencies within the borough area of Tower Hamlets  one of which (Stratford and Bow) was predominantly under the jurisdiction of Newham election authority with 3 Tower hamlets Borough wards falling under the ARO for Newham namely Bow East, Bow West and Bromley North. These changes will present challenges for electoral services and also where information will need to be provided to those in the three “give away” borough wards particularly if the elections are combined. Robert explained that  whilst this “give away” principle is a new development for Tower Hamlets, this scenario is  common nationally.
  
  

Further to questions, Committee members made the following observations:

venues that people familiar with and where turn-out had previously been high should be the preferred places and, conversely, places should be reviewed where their turnout is lower than expected.

RESOLVED that the Committee noted the verbal update.