This is an entry in a year-long project to post-blog the demobilisation experience for British servicemen at the end of the Second World War. See here for an introduction to the project and here for a brief overview of the demobilisation process.
The Times comments on the less-than-satisfactory arrangements for service voters in last July's general election, a final statistical analysis now having been published by the government. The scheme promised well at the outset in May, when 2.9 million names of servicemen and -women were placed on the military register, but after the original registration flaws quickly began to emerge. Over 425,000 applications for postal votes were denied because the names of the applicants were not on the service register, and 14,000 votes were refused because the voter forgot to include a declaration of identity. About 58% of service voters were ultimately included, but it is hard to know how many were undeservedly excluded from the franchise because of errors in red tape. "The circumstances were inevitably difficult," conceded the Times ...
This was a first attempt to collect the votes of citizens serving in three continents and on the high seas half way around the world. The lost votes are attributable to so many causes, including hostile action, that the responsibility does not rest anywhere in particular. Clearly, however, the arrangements for collecting service votes in another election in which, as may happen, substantial forces are still serving abroad must be more reliable as well as more expeditious.
Comments