Forum Topic

Ealing's Electoral Roll - a question.

In the February 2010 of "around Ealing" on page 6 under the heading "Electoral registration high" it states that more than 97% of the borough's adults who are eligible to vote are registered to do so. At first sight this may seem remarkable, only one other London borough beating Ealing.What I find even more remarkable is that the Council knows what number of eligible voters are in the borough to be able to produce that figure of 97% plus.My question is:how does the Council obtain that number that represents 100%?

Alan Brainsby ● 6082d6 Comments

Recently I read in a council paper that there are discrepancies between I think Ealing and the GLA as regards population stats. It must be very difficult to get any accuracy but I would be surprised if the Council have access to detailed NIC records, even though that idea has been mooted by the Electoral Commission but on a voluntary basis.. Also there is changing population and then always those who somehow manage perhaps to escape the Electoral roll process in say one year, but then not the next. 3% short (which must be partly a best estimate) is quite good and one of the benefits is that it helps Ealing base its claims for government grants on a more realistic basis. I wonder what number of people make up the 3%. Another benefit is that the Council only miss 3% when collecting Council Tax rather than say 5%.What would be far more interesting is to know how many adults live in Ealing who are not eligible to vote.Even more interesting would be an incentive to vote. I saw a figure suggesting that perhaps on average around 40% (nationally) vote at most in local elections.

George Knox ● 6082d

"Even more interesting would be an incentive to vote."Simple: a £100 fine for failing to vote - just like the Vehicle Excise Duty - No exceptions, no excuses, no escape!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXoUJN1O8i0

Alan Brainsby ● 6082d

Think how much Ealing Council would rake in.Let's ask Phil Taylor to introduce a new bye law.

George Knox ● 6082d

Re  Recently I read in a council paper that there are discrepancies between I think Ealing and the GLA as regards population stats             xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx        I recall having read somewhere many years ago after the figures of the 2001 Census came out that circa 3 million had not completed forms, and those were people who were known of. Trouble is there are so many in the UK who should not be, ie illegals and who number 1 million plus according to MediaWatch?, most of whom will be in London, so a figure of circa 4-5 thousand individuals in Ealing  seems much understated. And when the 2001 figures were published, the London Boroughs each contested their own allocated numbers as such fell far short of those claiming benefits in their respective Boroughs. Another Census next year.

Tony Price ● 6080d

"Trouble is there are so many in the UK who should not be, ie illegals and who number 1 million plus according to MediaWatch?, most of whom will be in London..."He's off again.

Robin Taylor ● 6080d

A rare occasion where he is not far off the mark, and it raises the point that the Labour party have been beyond the the pale in running the Home Office - part of which is still not fit.Stop picking and starting a fight Robin. I know he does -and his views are well known and very little supported on any of the threads. But you are doing other damage which I do not subscribe to with the forthcoming election. Think about it.In whose Parliamentary constituency do you live? Southall is Sharma. Never a mention there.

George Knox ● 6080d