Britain’s election system is working well, and voters retain high levels of confidence in it. That’s the good news from a report this week from the independent Electoral Commission on this country’s 2024 general election. But now the bad news, because it is really serious. Look more closely, and it is clear that British elections face changing threats and challenges about which no one should be complacent.
Easily the most disturbing part of the commission’s report deals with the increased level of abuse to which candidates and campaigners were subjected in the run-up to 4 July. The scale of the problem is staggering. More than half of all candidates who responded to the commission’s inquiries said they faced harassment, intimidation or abuse during the campaign. One-third said they were intentionally made to feel unsafe.
These are remarkable figures and shocking findings. They should not be dismissed or denigrated. On the contrary, they present a challenge to democratic stability that must be constantly addressed. The 2024 election, after all, was a fairly predictable affair, its outcome reasonably clear in advance. If the contest had been on a knife-edge, the threat level might have been much greater and more dangerous, with even lives at risk.
The findings are especially shocking because they were to some degree anticipated. This year, all election candidates were offered basic security advice in advance, and were given a link to a named police contact for reporting. Political parties were specifically enjoined to uphold campaign standards. In spite of this, the election generated an epidemic of intimidation.
By far the most common place for this abuse to take place was social media. Not much surprise there, perhaps. But social media connects to the wider world. The intimidation problem was in no way confined there. It was on the streets too. Nearly half of all candidates were abused or intimidated when they carried out that most mundanely pre-digital of election activities, the door-to-door canvass.
As a result, nearly half of all candidates avoided the risk of knocking on doors, rising to two-thirds of all women candidates. Minority ethnic candidates were the most likely to report a serious problem. Last week, we reported Labour party complaints about police failure to intervene after the family of Shabana Mahmood, now the justice secretary, faced several threats of this kind. The system is putting candidates’ safety at risk.
Intimidation is not the only problem. Postal voting, overseas voting, candidate nomination processes and electoral administration digital systems all need tightening. Voter ID requirements also continue to cause problems, though broader opposition seems to have waned. But intimidation could be the shape of the future if it is not prevented or prosecuted. The larger conclusion is that the democratic system has always to be on permanent alert. It has to be able to protect itself against any attempt to disrupt or humiliate it. Tactics like Elon Musk’s daily million-dollar lotteries in swing states during the US election show that the threats are constantly changing. No one can assume that such things are impossible in Britain.
Britain must take such issues seriously. It is genuinely reassuring that the conduct of elections is working well and that the public expresses confidence in the system. All that is in no small way due to the creation of the commission to supervise the process. When a way of life is at stake, the task requires ceaseless vigilance.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
