The Commission is currently collecting information to inform its statutory report on the Scottish Parliament elections. The report will include information about turnout and participation among 16- and 17-year-olds.

The report will also identify any conclusions which can be drawn from comparison with turnout and participation at previous polls, particularly the 2014 referendum.

The Electoral Commission is not currently carrying out any investigations into electoral fraud in Tower Hamlets. Any allegations of electoral fraud offences under the Representation of the People Act 1983 can only be investigated by the police, on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The Metropolitan Police Service is responsible for investigating any allegations relating to elections in Tower Hamlets, and the Commission will monitor the outcome of any investigations relating to electoral fraud offences.

In advance of the elections this May, the Commission is working closely with the police and electoral administrators in each of the 18 areas it has identified as being at higher risk of allegations of electoral fraud, including Tower Hamlets, to ensure that robust plans are in place to detect and prevent fraud.

The Electoral Commission works with the National Police Chiefs’ Council to collate data from police forces about cases of alleged electoral fraud reported each year. This data is published on the Commission’s website.

The data show that 49 cases of alleged electoral fraud offences were reported in Tower Hamlets in 2014. Of these cases, no further action was taken following investigation by the police in 39 cases. This was either because the activity involved was not in fact an offence; there was no evidence that an offence had been committed; or there was insufficient evidence to identify a perpetrator. It also included cases which, following investigation, were found not to have involved electoral fraud offences.

Five cases were locally resolved with advice from the police or the Returning Officer, and one case resulted in a caution being given. Of the remaining four cases, one resulted in court proceedings being initiated, one awaits prosecution advice and two remain under investigation.

A total of 28 cases of alleged electoral fraud offences were reported in Tower Hamlets in 2015. No further action was taken following investigation by the police in 23 cases, and one case was locally resolved. One case awaits prosecution advice and three remain under investigation. The Commission will monitor the outcome of any investigations relating to electoral fraud offences.

In advance of the May 2016 elections, the Commission is working closely with the police and electoral administrators in each of the 18 areas it has identified as being at higher risk of allegations of electoral fraud, including Tower Hamlets, to ensure that robust plans are in place to detect and prevent fraud.

The Commission also encourages anyone who has evidence that an electoral offence may have been committed to report this to the police, either directly or anonymously through Crimestoppers.

The Electoral Commission recently wrote to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, following that Committee’s recent evidence session, on a number of issues, including the potential impact of the date of the referendum if it were to be held in June. A copy of the letter is available on the Committee’s website.

The Electoral Commission recently wrote to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, following that Committee’s recent evidence session, on a number of issues, including the potential impact of the date of the referendum if it were to be held in June. A copy of the letter is available on the Committee’s website.

What recent assessment the Electoral Commission has made of the potential effect of the date of the EU referendum on mayoral, local, and devolved institutions' elections.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that answer. As he will know, early-day motion 1042, in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife (Stephen Gethins), has cross-party support in the House. It calls for the EU referendum not to be held in June.

Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that holding the referendum in June would seriously undermine the democratic process? Furthermore, yesterday the First Ministers of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales published a joint letter calling for the EU referendum not to be held in June. Does he not agree that the Government should respect the calls from the devolved Administrations and defer the referendum?

Given the lengthy procedure for determining the lead organisation, will my hon. Friend make it clear that the Electoral Commission will ensure that it appoints a lead organisation in sufficient time—and not halfway through the campaign?

Will my hon. Friend confirm whether the Electoral Commission has given any views about potential dates for the EU referendum in June?

In January 2014, the Electoral Commission published its review of electoral fraud in the UK, which followed research and wide public consultation on a number of proposals for reducing absent voting vulnerabilities, including reversing the current availability of postal voting on demand without a reason or attestation in Great Britain.

While some respondents to the Commission’s consultation supported restricting the availability of postal voting on demand to address the risk of electoral fraud, others expressed concern that it would reduce convenience and could mean that some electors would be unable to vote. Respondents also suggested that restricting the availability of postal voting on demand would be disproportionate to the number and scale of proven cases of postal voting fraud.

The Commission’s review concluded that restricting the availability of postal voting would remove the freedom for electors to choose a convenient and, for the vast majority, secure, method of voting and on balance did not support changing the availability of postal voting in Great Britain. At the May 2015 UK Parliamentary general election postal votes were issued to around 7.6 million electors in Great Britain, representing nearly 17% of the total electorate. At present, the Commission is aware of 22 cases of alleged electoral fraud at the May 2015 polls involving postal votes. The Commission continues to monitor data about cases of alleged postal voting fraud, and will keep its assessment of the impact of restricting the availability of postal voting under review in light of any new evidence which becomes available.

The Commission’s review also considered whether there was a case for further restricting the availability of proxy voting by requiring all proxy applications to be attested; limiting proxy voting to a smaller range of categories of need, such as special category electors; or imposing further limits on the number of electors for whom an individual could be appointed to act as a proxy. Respondents to the Commission’s consultation expressed concern that such restrictions could have an impact on voter participation, especially for disabled voters or those outside the country at the time of the election for whom proxy voting might be the only way in which they are able to vote. On balance, the Commission did not support placing further restrictions on the availability of proxy voting.

The Speaker's Committee is in regular dialogue with the Electoral Commission on matters concerning electoral fraud, most notably in advance of the Commission publishing its corporate plan on an annual basis.

The Commission provides advice to those who are involved on the frontline in identifying, investigating and prosecuting cases of electoral fraud. Before each set of elections the Commission provides advice to the police, electoral administrators and others on ways to prevent and detect electoral fraud, based on the best practice it has identified through working with partners across electoral administration and the justice system. Each year the Commission publishes data on allegations of electoral fraud that are reported to the police.

The Commission targets additional support for those on the front line in 18 areas in England where there is a higher risk of allegations of electoral fraud. This includes Slough and the Commission will be working again with these areas before the elections in May 2016 to build on what was done prior to the General Election. The Commission issued briefings to all honourable members in the last parliament on the work it was undertaking prior to the General Election to help tackle electoral fraud and will do so again before the elections in May 2016.

In its 2014 review of electoral fraud, the Commission recommended that voters in Great Britain should be required to produce ID at polling stations, although it is yet to receive a response to this recommendation from the Government. The Commission has submitted evidence to the review being undertaken by Sir Eric Pickles and hopes that he agrees with it and that the Government accepts the Commission’s recommendation.

The Commission provides advice to those who are involved on the frontline in identifying, investigating and prosecuting cases of electoral fraud. Before each set of elections the Commission provides advice to the police, electoral administrators and others on ways to prevent and detect electoral fraud, based on the best practice it has identified through working with partners across electoral administration and the justice system. Each year the Commission publishes data on allegations of electoral fraud that are reported to the police.

The Commission targets additional support for those on the front line in 18 areas in England where there is a higher risk of allegations of electoral fraud. This includes Peterborough and the Commission will be working again with these areas before the elections in May 2016 to build on what was done prior to the General Election. The Commission issued briefings to all honourable members in the last parliament on the work it was undertaking prior to the General Election to help tackle electoral fraud and will do so again before the elections in May 2016.

In its 2014 review of electoral fraud, the Commission recommended that voters in Great Britain should be required to produce ID at polling stations, although it is yet to receive a response to this recommendation from the Government. The Commission has submitted evidence to the review being undertaken by Sir Eric Pickles and hopes that he agrees with it and that the Government accepts the Commission’s recommendation.

The Electoral Commission’s Corporate Plan 2015-16 to 2019-20 states that “Although there is no evidence that electoral fraud is widespread in the United Kingdom, and the number of cases of alleged electoral fraud reported to the police is relatively low compared with the number of contests and the number of people who vote in elections each year, there is a consistent level of public concern about electoral fraud.”

The evidence underpinning the approach taken by the Commission in its corporate plan was set out in the final report of its 18-month review of electoral fraud vulnerabilities, which involved research with the public and wide consultation, including with elected representatives, political parties, electoral professionals, the police and prosecuting authorities, academics, voluntary organisations, think tanks and the UK Government. It was also based on data about allegations of electoral fraud reported to police forces across the UK that has been collated and published by the Commission since 2008.

Both reports are available on the Commission’s website and were sent to all honourable members.

The Electoral Commission works closely with the police and returning officers in areas where there have been allegations of electoral fraud, and it has paid particular attention to Tower Hamlets since 2012. The Commission tells me it has focussed on election planning and electoral registration activities in Tower Hamlets, and has attended regular election planning meetings with the Returning Officer and the Metropolitan Police Service since 2013 to scrutinise and monitor the delivery of those activities in advance of the European Parliament and local government elections in 2014 and the UK Parliamentary elections in 2015.

The Commission has also published several detailed reports on electoral fraud and electoral administration in Tower Hamlets, including a report following allegations of electoral fraud at elections in May 2102 and following problems at the count for the May 2014 elections. These reports have included specific recommendations for the Returning Officer, the Metropolitan Police Service, political parties and candidates at future elections, and the Commission has continued to monitor progress towards those recommendations and provide additional support where it is required.

The Electoral Commission informs me that it is satisfied that the documentation submitted to it in 2013 by ‘Tower Hamlets First’ met the statutory threshold requirements for registration of a political party. The Election Court judgement does not find otherwise. The barriers to registering as a political party are limited with the law requiring only certain specific criteria to be met before the Commission must add parties to the register.

Following the findings of the Court in April this year, the Commission promptly reviewed and removed the party's registration. In light of the comments made by Commissioner Richard Mawrey QC, the Commission has also indicated that it has reviewed its guidance and advice to applicants from new parties on a proposed party’s ‘Financial Scheme’ to further emphasise the responsibility of a registered party to have processes in place to meet their legal obligations. When the Committee considers the Electoral Commission’s Five Year Plain, it may consider whether any further steps are necessary.

The Electoral Commission’s performance standards framework is for Returning Officers (RO) and Electoral Registration Officers (ERO), not local authorities. There are separate standards for each role and each has elements relating to the RO and ERO’s responsibilities for supporting electoral integrity.

Between 2008 and 2013, the ERO for Tower Hamlets was assessed as ‘meeting’ or ‘above’ all the ERO standards (including the integrity standards) each year. From 2014, the Commission’s standards for EROs changed to reflect the transition to Individual Electoral Registration. The ERO was assessed as meeting the first standard (which related to public engagement activities) in 2014. The Commission will report on the second standard (implementation of their plans) following the canvass taking place in late 2015.

Between 2009 and 2013, in the years in which elections were held, the RO for Tower Hamlets assessed their performance as meeting or above the standard. In 2014, a new performance standards framework for ROs removed self-assessment. The Commission was unable to confirm a performance standards assessment for Tower Hamlets following the May 2014 elections due to a petition that concluded in April 2015 but will be making its performance assessment shortly.

Performance standards are not the only measure of addressing integrity issues and the Commission expects more from EROs and ROs in areas where there is a history of electoral fraud allegations.

In March 2013 the Commission undertook a review of complaints and allegations made at elections in Tower Hamlets in 2012, and made recommendations to all those involved in upholding the integrity of elections in the borough in order to rebuild confidence and trust. The Commission published further updates on progress in Tower Hamlets in July 2013 and April 2014.

Tower Hamlets was identified by the Commission, prior to the May 2014 elections, as one of 16 areas nationally which were at higher risk of allegations of electoral fraud. In the months leading up to the May 2014 elections, the Commission closely monitored progress towards implementing those recommendations, meeting the RO for Tower Hamlets and the Metropolitan Police regularly to review their plans, and attending briefing meetings for prospective candidates. This work continued ahead of the May 2015 polls.

The aim of the Commission is to regulate in a way that is effective, proportionate and fair, in line with the principles of good regulation. Wherever possible, the Commission will use advice and guidance to assist people to help them to comply with legislation but will monitor and take enforcement action where necessary.

In 2014-15, two full time equivalent Commission employees (based on average full time equivalent employees over the year) worked on enforcement and monitoring of the Transparency of Lobbying, Third Party Campaigning and Trade Union Act 2014 and the average full time equivalent budget for 2015-16 is 3.92 staff.

The aim of the Commission is to regulate in a way that is effective, proportionate and fair, in line with the principles of good regulation. Wherever possible, the Commission will use advice and guidance to assist people to help them to comply with legislation but will monitor and take enforcement action where necessary.

The Commission plans to spend £182,000 in 2015-16 on enforcement and monitoring of the Transparency of Lobbying, Third Party Campaigning and Trade Union Act 2014.

The aim of the Commission is to regulate in a way that is effective, proportionate and fair, in line with the principles of good regulation. Wherever possible, the Commission will use advice and guidance to assist people to help them to comply with legislation but will monitor and take enforcement action where necessary.

The Commission spent £66,000 on enforcement and monitoring of the Transparency of Lobbying, Third Party Campaigning and Trade Union Act 2014 in the eleven months to the end of February 2015 and estimates that expenditure for the whole of 2014-15 will be £80,000.