prepared for: the electoral commission...‘it’s just some people have been voting twice or 3...

REGISTERING

TO VOTE

MAY 2003

Prepared For: THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION

Prepared By: MILLWARD BROWN ULSTER U.3067

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Summary of Key Findings.......................................................................................................2

2. Introduction ................................................................................................................................3

2.1. Quantitative........................................................................................................................3

2.2. Qualitative ..........................................................................................................................4

3. Community Concerns Over Voter Registration Process ...........................................7

4. The Need For Electoral Reform .............................................................................................8

4.1. Did Fruad Happen? ..........................................................................................................8

4.2. How Fraud Happened......................................................................................................9

4.3. Electoral Fraud................................................................................................................10

5. Motivation To Register...........................................................................................................11

5.1. The Protestant Perspective...........................................................................................11

5.2. The Catholic Perspective...............................................................................................13

6. Awareness And Registration ...............................................................................................14

7. Validating Registration .........................................................................................................25

8. Demotivators Behind Non-Registration ............................................................................26

8.1. Apathy ..............................................................................................................................26

8.2. Disaffection ......................................................................................................................28

8.3. Dillusionment ...................................................................................................................29

8.4. Anomie .............................................................................................................................30

9. Registrants ................................................................................................................................31

10. Ease Or Difficulty Of Completing The Form.....................................................................35

10.1. Understanding The Form...............................................................................................35

10.2. National Insurance Number ..........................................................................................39

10.3. Individual Signature........................................................................................................40

10.4. Identification Card...........................................................................................................41

10.5. Edited Register................................................................................................................42

10.6. Nationality ........................................................................................................................43

11. Voting Attitudes And Behaviour..........................................................................................44

12. Registration ID .........................................................................................................................53

2

1. SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS

1. The strongest correlation with non-registration is with age, with the younger electorate being significantly less likely to have registered to vote.

2. There are secondary correlations suggesting that those less likely to have

registered to vote are more likely to be: I. Living in urban areas

II. from working class backgrounds III. from Protestant denominations, and IV. Of a loyalist ideology

3. Attitudinally, non-registrants demonstrate apathy and lack of engagement with

politics. Disenchantment with politicians underpins voter apathy generally. 4. The major reason for non-registration is non-receipt of form.

5. The registration form presents little difficulty in itself, but the need to

individually complete the form is sufficient of a barrier to discourage the politically apathetic.

6. Motivation to, and awareness of how to, request a form is weak

7. ID applicants and non-returns of form is most heavily concentrated amongst

DE’s

8. One third of the electorate have alternative ID, despite ticking box 9

9. Overall, support for new system is positive. The only group showing significant disapproval are Republicans

10. Motivation for voting is primarily related to sense of citizenship and social

conscience.

3

2. INTRODUCTION

It has long been recognised that there were considerable deficiencies in the Electoral

Register for Northern Ireland, with consequent irregularities in voting, including fraud.

Accordingly, the Electoral Fraud Act provided for a new registration procedure, and the

Electoral Commission wished to conduct a wide ranging investigation into the inclusivity of

the new register, and attitudes to the registration process. Millward Brown Ulster were

commissioned to carry out a 2-stage research project, spanning both quantitative and

qualitative methodologies.

2.1. QUANTITATIVE

The main quantitative survey involved a quota controlled sample of 1023 adults aged

18+, fully representative of the Northern Ireland population. This survey was carried

out by face-to-face interviewing between the 7th and 21st April 2003, and was

followed by 2 boosters of a) non-registrants and b) electoral ID applicants who had

not returned the application form. The purpose of these boosters was to enhance the

base number of these important sub-groups, as their actual (i.e., representative)

numbers within the main survey were uncertain at the outset. The absolute numbers

of these sub-groups which were achieved (including those emerging in the main

survey), were:

•

•

Non-registrants : 455

Electoral ID non-returners : 171

The computer tables emerging for the main survey were grossed up (in thousands),

to the total population of 1.233 million (from the 2001 Census) and the computer

tables for the booster surveys were also provided separately.

The questionnaire for the survey was developed through a series of drafts, and took

into account preliminary findings from the qualitative research which partially

preceded the quantitative survey.

4

The scope of the questionnaire included:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Awareness of new registration process

Incidence of registration

Attitudes to registration and reasons for non-registration

Approval of the new registration process

Typical voting behaviour

Attitudes to elections

Awareness of ID requirements

Holdership of photographic ID

The survey was conducted with full regard for the inclusion of all segments of the

community by way of gender, age, income / employment status, religion, ethnic

background, and disability. Quality control procedures were fully in line with the

requirements of the Interviewer Quality Control Scheme (IQCS), of which Millward

Brown Ulster is Northern Ireland’s only founder member, and according to the code

of conduct of the Market Research Society. These quality controls included data

logic checks, supervisory inspection of all questionnaires, and telephone or postal

back-checking amongst a minimum of 10% of respondents.

2.2. QUALITATIVE

In order to enhance insight into public perceptions and attitudes with regard to

electoral registration and voting, and to contribute to the main stage questionnaire, a

series of 8 group discussions was conducted during April. The structure of these

group discussions was designed to allow for particular focus on non-registrants, so

that their underlying attitudes to registration and reasons for non-registering, could be

thoroughly explored.

The key objectives of the research were:

To examine overall perceptions of the process of voter registration in 2002 compared

to previous years

To explore the process of filling in the registration form

5

To ascertain why non-registered individuals have elected not to complete the

registration form

The ease or difficulty experienced in completing the form

The perceptions of the mechanisms put in place through this new registration

process

To investigate the inferences about how this new process may have changed voting

registration behaviour in their area

The timetable for the research did not facilitate the qualitative phase being undertaken after

the quantitative research. As a consequence half of the group schedule was conducted

before the commencement of the survey, permitting the questionnaire development to be

informed by the perceptions and misconceptions identified during the early phase of the

focus group schedule. A consequence of this phasing was that the focus group schedule

could not be designed on the basis of any known demographic variables associated with

non-registration. Thus the only factors to be designed into the schedule related to religion

and gender. The age and socio-economic profile of the groups was left open. In the

absence of demographic information on the nature of non-registrants, an effort was made to

reflect areas in which the level of registration was higher than average, average, and

significantly lower than average, as illustrated below:

Religion DCA Ward % Registered Dec 2002 compared to Census (Previous register)

1 Protestant Urban Belfast Woodstock 73% (80%)

2 Catholic Urban Lisburn Poleglass 75% (78%)

3 Protestant Urban Derry Altnagelvin 82% (86%)

4 Catholic Urban Derry Strand 63% (84%)

5 Protestant Urban Lisburn Hilden 80% (87%)

6 Catholic Urban Belfast Cavehill/ Ardoyne

90%/ 74% (90%/ 78%)

7 Catholic Rural Dungannon Washing Bay 113% (92%)

8 Protestant Rural Dungannon Caledon/ Castlecaufield

103%/ 102% (94%/ 92%)

Although the original schedule was designed to provide a more even balance between

urban and rural localities, it proved very difficult to identify a sufficient number of non-

registrants in two of the originally selected rural wards, and urban wards had to be

substituted.

6

Whilst the socio-economic profile of the groups was not predetermined, it should be noted

that the non-registrants exhibited a distinct C2DE bias.

7

3. COMMUNITY CONCERNS OVER VOTER REGISTRATION PROCESS Focus group discussions commenced by addressing any general concerns within the local

community regarding the registration process. It became evident that no-one had heard any

talk within their circle of friends or acquaintances; neither had they heard any comment by

any of the political parties on the issue. The only incidence of political parties

communicating on an element of the voting process was restricted to Poleglass where some

individuals reported being asked whether younger family members would be old enough to

register to vote.

‘I don’t think it’s a topic of conversation that people want to talk about…. I don’t think anybody is interested.’ Protestant/Unionist

8

4. THE NEED FOR ELECTORAL REFORM

4.1. DID FRAUD HAPPEN? All groups regardless of the political or religious affiliation considered fraudulent voting to be

a common practice in Northern Ireland, although opinions differed on the extent of this

practice, ranging from guesstimates that 10% of the vote may be fraudulent up to

expectations that as much as half of the votes cast have been fraudulent. On the whole,

expectations were typically that 15-20% of the votes cast may have been fraudulent.

Regardless of religious or political affiliation it was believed that fraudulent voting is more

prevalent in urban areas and more specifically in Belfast. There was also an expectation

that fraud was most prevalent in hard line Republican or Loyalist enclaves.

However, Protestants were more likely to suggest that fraudulent voting was most common

amongst those from a nationalist persuasion, whereas, Catholic groups perceived fraudulent

voting to be more evenly balanced on both sides of the political divide.

Based on these beliefs, there was a general acceptance of the need for electoral reform to

combat fraud. Males in the Catholic registered group were the exception, suggesting that

reform was motivated by a desire to ‘pander’ to the Protestant electorate, being a direct

reaction to the controversy surrounding the election of Sinn Fein’s Michelle Gildernew.

(This very close election result in Fermanagh and South Tyrone had been challenged by the

losing Unionist, James Cooper, on the grounds of irregularities at the Garrison polling station

which remained open one hour past the official deadline, and it was alleged that ballot boxes

were taken from the control of election officers).

‘Well if you look at it from a law point of view, it is reasonable but if you look at it from a political point of view, it’s not reasonable. It depends on the way you look at it.’ Catholic/Nationalist ‘There were only a few votes and I mean the unionist and Protestant community very much made out the Catholics impersonated. I think it would be in their interest to make sure that there’s no more impersonation and that one person votes only once.’ Catholic/Nationalist

9

4.2. HOW FRAUD HAPPENED

Fraudulent voting was perceived to have been a consequence of:

• Personation of registered voters – that is votes used by persons other than the

eligible voter themselves, with or without their consent

• Personation of deceased registered voters – most were unaware that the electoral

register is now updated on a monthly basis to eliminate those that have been

registered as deceased

• The deliberate maximisation of voter registration - that is polling cards sought for

household members normally living outside Northern Ireland

‘It’s just some people have been voting twice or 3 times. Somebody who lives in England or abroad and they’re not that person at all and another person votes for them.’ Catholic/Nationalist ‘I remember years ago like about 6 or 7 there were people going in and voting and coming out and putting a disguise on and going in and voting again. I’ve heard of that one alright.’ Protestant/Unionist ‘My name has been used a few times and I have never been a voter once. Because I have been told there is people that I know done it and used my name and told me that they used my name--- they know I don’t vote. They just asked me and I gave them my medical card to do it and they went in with my medical card and used it and voted.’ Catholic/Nationalist ‘In West Belfast as well they are always looking for a Sinn Fein councillor over West Belfast…. So therefore they go and get (the votes) you know like I know of it happening and they get dead peoples medical cards and do it that way.’ Catholic/Nationalist ‘Old people who have passed away fairly recently, their vote would be invalid because they’re dead but it has been used.’ Protestant/Unionist

10

4.3. ELECTORAL FRAUD

Whilst Catholics believed that Protestants were more honest and therefore suspected that

fraud was lower amongst the loyalist/Protestant voters, Protestants were more sceptical of

their republican/Catholic counterparts. The Protestant perception of greater levels of fraud

within nationalist areas is attributed to a variety of factors:

o the anticipation of a greater degree of intimidation in republican areas

o coupled with the perception that the practice of ‘voting early & voting often’ has been

endemic amongst nationalists for many years.

Factors that were considered to mitigate against or at least ameliorate levels of fraudulent

voting in the Protestant community centred on:

perceptions of lower levels of motivation to enhance voter numbers, arising out of the

majority status of this community

the impressions that unionism had less to gain from electoral fraud

and the high level of fragmentation amongst unionism presently.

11

5. MOTIVATION TO REGISTER

5.1. THE PROTESTANT PERSPECTIVE Four factors emerged as features of why Protestants might be motivated to register to vote:

I. The recent events involving accusations of electoral malpractice in Fermanagh and

South Tyrone was a highly emotive issue encouraging Protestants to exercise their

right to register and vote. The proximity of the group location (registered Protestants)

to this constituency may have amplified this effect.

II. Heritage and tradition on the Protestant side also played a major role, with many

suggesting a familial history of exercising the right to vote. The impact of familial

pressure was equally evidenced in the Catholic group

‘It was my mum would vote but it’s been like a family thing, we have always voted and my mum probably would know lots of the MP’s round the area so she has voted and she would be, well you should because at the end of the day our vote counts and she would be strong about it, but I just would never ever have any interest in it and she would well fill in the form anyway.’

Protestant/Unionist

III. In all groups regardless of whether individuals were registered or not and regardless

of denomination there was a pervasive ignorance of the electoral process and

overwhelming credence given to the myth of ‘the other side getting your vote’ if it is

not used. Whilst no-one could articulate the mechanism by which this might happen,

this did not detract from the credibility of the assertion that unused votes might be

utilised by those with opposing political views. What was different in the registered

Protestant group was that this argument was expanded to suggest that there may be

some manner in which the Government might deploy the unused Protestant votes to

further their (by inference pro-nationalist) agenda.

But sure if somebody doesn’t vote you’d get probably Catholics would get our vote which has happened in the past. I mean if you don’t vote that vote should be invalid. It shouldn’t be validated by somebody else.’

Protestant/Unionist

12

‘If you don’t fill in your form some one else gets to use it. Gets to use your vote.’ Protestant/Unionist

‘Say there’s a million people got a million votes if 600,000 vote that leaves 400,000 that they could use to play about with, know what I mean. Add onto somebody else’s vote.’

Protestant/Unionist

If the government want a specific person to lead whatever they have power to work that out for say someone who is dead and add it on to their candidate so the Government have the use of it I would say.’

Protestant/Unionist

IV. Finally, there was a prevalent perception that the ‘other side’ was more motivated to

secure the Nationalist vote and therefore it was imperative to make all Unionist votes

count.

‘The only reason that people feel they have to vote like I said just to keep the other side down.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘I think Catholics tend to vote because of what they’re striving for. They would be told from a young age this is what we’re aiming for. We need is bla bla bla, go out and vote.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘I work in a hospital plus I go to university so there would be discussion in those areas and both sides would discuss it with each other and I have to admit the other side is obviously, they’re very well into it where we pull back a wee bit more and think, no because we think are they worthy of being in the position to tell us what to do, whereas they’re more tight knitted.’

Protestant/Unionist

13

However, notwithstanding a commitment to vote, this group showed significant signs of

disillusionment with politicians. The main criticisms centred on:

The disparity between contact levels pre and post election times, specifically that

politicians only make contact at pre-election times.

Growing perception of a lack of accountability on the part of politicians. Such a

sentiment appeared to have been derived from two perspectives, resentment that

Unionist politicians no longer listen to the community they represent and a very

substantial sense of grievance over the perceived lack of responsiveness on the part

of Unionist politicians to act on behalf of the interests of their individual constituents.

The latter sentiment is particularly acutely felt in comparison to a perception that

Nationalist representatives are considerably more responsive to their constituents

needs.

Unionist politicians were also accused of the ‘gravy train’ syndrome, that is of being

primarily, if not exclusively motivated by self reward. Such a belief was frequently

substantiated by recounting the fact that one of the initial acts of the Northern Ireland

Assembly was to vote for an MLA pay rise.

5.2. THE CATHOLIC PERSPECTIVE

The two most substantial factors motivating the registered Catholic group to register to vote

were based on sentiments shared by the Protestant community:

o The overwhelming prevalence of the myth of the ‘other side getting your vote’.

Registered and non-registered groups were equally likely to assert this myth as fact

and express extreme dissonance if anyone were to suggest that this was not

factually correct. Indeed it was clear that this argument of the ‘other side getting your

vote’ was not seen simply as the impact of differential turn-out rates in a polarised

political context but rather as a tangible mechanism that came into play by unseen

persons. That no-one could explain who, where, or when this manipulation of

unused votes came into play did not detract from the credibility of the argument. An

argument that was passed on within both the family and the community.

14

‘If you don’t vote your vote automatically goes to the Protestants, that’s what I grew up being told, if you don’t vote the other side gets your vote.’ Catholic/ Nationalist

o A high degree of familial pressure coupled in the Catholic community with a sense of

moral responsibility to vote in light of the endeavours of those that had striven in the

past to achieve that right for Catholics.

‘I would be sort of pressurised into vote like by certain members of my family’ Catholic/ Nationalist

6. AWARENESS AND REGISTRATION

At the outset of the quantitative survey, respondents were asked if they were aware of the

new Electoral Registration procedures, and it was encouraging to note that the majority of

84% replied in the affirmative. However, this left a residue of 16% who appeared to have

missed the extensive advertising and promotional campaigns. Generally, this group were

evenly distributed demographically with the exception of age, where there was an uplift of

32% amongst 18 to 24 year olds, falling to around to 13% amongst the rest of the

population.

15

AWARENESS OF AWARENESS OF NEW ELECTORAL REGISTRATIONNEW ELECTORAL REGISTRATION

[ Base: All Respondents ]

CLASSAGESEX

84

16

85

15

83

17

84

16

86

14

90

10

83

17

87

13

85

15

68

32

84

16

83

17

84

16

Yes

No

%%%%%%%%%%%%%DEC2C1AB65+55-6445-5435-4425-3418-24FEMALEMALETOTAL

It should be observed that with all awareness campaigns, achieving universal awareness of

100% is well nigh impossible: there will always be a small percentage (typically with

extremely low media absorption and limited social contact), who will be very hard or

impossible to reach. Amongst those expressing awareness of the new procedures, one

quarter were unable to specify details of the changes, but most were able to volunteer one or

other of the key features. The most salient changes related to the introduction of individual

registration (cited by 28%); the need for photographic ID (22%); the insertion of national

insurance numbers (19%); and the need to provide more personal information (15%).

Rather fewer (10%) cited the requirement for personal signature, and 7% mentioned the

date of birth requirement. As an overview, awareness of the general introduction of the new

registration appears to have been effectively achieved, although there may be some

continuing need to focus communications on younger people.

16

AWARENESS OF CHANGESAWARENESS OF CHANGES[ Base: All Aware ]

28%

22%

19%

15%

10%

7%

4%

4%

8%

25%

Individual registration

ID cards / need photo ID

National Insurance NumberNeed to provide more personal

informationSignature

Date of birth

No longer household registrationDifferent forms of register - can take

name off edited registerOther

Don't know

A key component of the research was to assess the incidence of actually completing the

registration form, and 75% of those interviewed affirmed they had done so. 6% were

unsure, and 19% replied definitively that they had not. (At this stage of the interview,

respondents were invited to look at an actual registration form, in order to optimise recall.)

COMPLETED REGISTRATION FORMCOMPLETED REGISTRATION FORM[ Base: All Respondents ]

AGESEX

80

14

5

82

11

7

76

16

8

79

15

6

69

26

6

60

33

7

76

17

6

73

21

6

75

19

6

Yes

No

Don’t know

%%%%%%%%%

65+55-6445-5435-4425-3418-24FEMALEMALETOTAL

17

When this overall registration behaviour was analysed demographically, a number of

correlations were observed.

Class: those in lower socio-economic classes were less likely to have registered

(23% of DE compared to 15% of AB)

•

•

•

•

•

Area: Belfast appeared to have a significantly lower level of registration than the rest

of Northern Ireland

Sex: women were marginally more likely to have registered than men

Religion: Catholics were slightly more likely to have registered than Protestants

Political Ideology: “Loyalists” were appreciably less likely to have registered than

Republicans, Nationalists or Unionists.


CLASS

70

23

7

%

DE

77

18

4

76

17

7

80

15

5

75

19

6

Yes

No

Don’t know

%%%%

C2C1ABTOTAL

However, by far the strongest correlation against registration behaviour was in respect of

age, with only 60% of those aged 18 – 24 having registered, compared to just over 80% of

the over 55’s. Thus, the strongest correlation is with age, and it also appears that urban

Protestant Loyalists have demonstrated low registration behaviour.

‘I think older people tend to vote nowadays 'cos they’ve been used to it in the past. A lot of my friends around my age wouldn’t bother filling them forms in.’

18


RELIGIONAREA

77

19

5

%

CATHOLIC

76

20

4

%

WEST

74

19

7

%

PROTESTANT

76

17

7

79

15

6

69

23

8

75

19

6

Yes

No

Don’t know

%%%%

SOUTHNORTHBELFASTTOTAL


IDEOLOGY

70

23

7

74

19

7

65

28

7

77

15

7

79

18

4

79

21

0

75

19

6

Yes

No

Don’t know

%%%%%%%

NONEOTHERLOYALISTUNIONISTNATIONALISTREPUBLICANTOTAL

Just under 6 in 10 of those who had registered said that the form had been collected by a

canvasser and just under 4 in 10 said that they had posted the form. Only 1% said that they

were still in receipt of the form. Postal return appeared to be rather higher in Belfast City,

and lower in the “South” region (mostly Down and Armagh). In broad terms this appears to

19

suggest some significant variability in the effectiveness of canvassers.

COLLECTION OF FORMCOLLECTION OF FORM[ Base: All Completed ]

AREA

50

43

2

5

65

28

1

6

62

34

1

4

51

45

0

3

57

37

1

5

Yes, canvasser

Yes, posted

No, still have it

Don’t know / not sure

%%%%%

WESTSOUTHNORTHBELFAST CITYTOTAL

A key objective of the research was to assess the reasons for non-registration and one of

the most important findings was that this is the result simply of not having ever received the

registration form in the first place. Only 1 in 4 of those respondents who had not registered

had clear recollection of receiving the form, and 4 in 10 were adamant that they had not

received it. The remainder (35%) were unsure as to whether they had received the form,

and had no clear recollection of ever having done so.

20

INCIDENCE OF RECEIVING FORMINCIDENCE OF RECEIVING FORM[ Base: All Not Completed ]

24%

41%

35%

Yes

No

Don't know

This non-receipt of the form had only slight demographic variance across the non-registered,

and even applied at much the same level amongst those (the majority) who had been on the

previous register. (94% of new registrants and 73% of non-registrants said they had been

on the previous register). However, young people and the elderly evinced the lowest levels

of receipt of the form. Amongst the 24% of the non-registered who had actually received

the form, the reasons for non-completion heavily pointed to a combination of procrastination,

apathy, and disinterest in voting.

PROMPTED REASONS FOR PROMPTED REASONS FOR NONNON--COMPLETIONCOMPLETION

[ Base: All Received Form But Not Completed ]

4031

2322

76

44

3333

222

16

Haven't got round to it / will do sometimeNot interested in voting

Lost it / don't know where it isCouldn't be bothered

Don't like giving personal details

Too complicated / don't understand itCanvasser didn't pick it up

Can't find National Insurance NumberSecurity reasons

Someone else in household completes forms

Current address temporary / will be moving awayHaven't got photographic ID

Invasion of privacy / register not confidentialIncapacitated / disabled

Don't trust any of the politicians

Didn't want to be called for jury serviceOther

TOTAL%

21

‘When I do get something through the door, I do want to fill it in but I just don’t and its laziness and it just gets threw out.’ ‘There are more things to worry about never mind the voting… It’s just full of ***** …What does it do? What does voting do to help us, it doesn’t do nothing.’

The only other significant reason was because the form had been lost, and only small

minorities suggested that it was because they didn’t like giving personal details, or that the

form was too complicated. Similarly, only a tiny minority said they couldn’t find their national

insurance number.

‘I don’t like the way it has happened the way you have to give your national insurance number. There’s too many of your personal details and that’s why I didn’t register this time.’

Given the high degree of apathy therefore, it was not surprising that the overwhelming

majority (96%) had not taken any personal initiative to request a registration form: the low

motivation was exacerbated by unawareness of who to contact. In further reducing the

numbers of non-registrations therefore, it can be safely concluded that increased efforts to

get registration forms into the hands of non-registrants is essential. One possibility might be

a postal despatch utilising the Postal Address File, if it were possible to cross-reference this

database with the existing electoral register.

INCIDENCE OF REQUESTING FORMINCIDENCE OF REQUESTING FORM[ Base: All Not Received ]

4%

88%

8%

Yes

No

Don't know

22

On completion of the main survey, the 6% who were unsure whether they had registered

were checked against the register, and it transpired that 80% were actually registered. This

finding indicates that, for many people, the registration form was completed in a very casual

manner with minimal attention: further evidence for this trait lay in the widespread

uncertainty as to whether the 2 boxes (for opting on to the edited version and ID application)

had been ticked. It is also feasible that some of this 6% had had their form completed by

someone else in the household, their own contribution possibly being no more than to sign –

some may not even been asked to perform that minimal task. Demographically, those who

were uncertain about completing the form were very evenly dispersed, but were appreciably

more likely to be located in constituencies which were not closely fought – hence it can be

inferred that a casual approach to registration is linked to a lower local political intensity.

In view of the significant level of non-registration, it is important to elucidate whether these

individuals and indeed the population as a whole, were aware of the facility for “rolling

registration”, i.e. that it is possible to apply for registration at any point in time (up to 6 weeks

before elections). However, it was evident that there was widespread ignorance of this

feature, particularly amongst young people. Hence, although awareness of the overall

registration principles appears to be well developed, it is clear that this particular issue needs

further communication. Furthermore, that increased effort may need to be devoted to

accessing and encouraging residual non-registrants was reinforced by the fact that only 46%

of them indicated that they actually intended to register: this fell further to only 28% of those

aged 18 to 24.

AWARE OF ROLLING REGISTRATIONAWARE OF ROLLING REGISTRATION[ Base: All Not Registered ]

AGESEX

47

51

2

52

36

12

47

41

12

44

43

13

38

59

3

20

78

2

35

54

11

43

55

2

39

54

7

Yes

No

Don’t know

%%%%%%%%%


23

AGESEX

53

13

34

65

4

32

46

21

32

59

15

26

40

21

40

28

37

35

50

12

38

42

29

29

46

21

33

Yes

No

Not sure –haven’t decided

%%%%%%%%%


INTENTIONS OF REGISTERINGINTENTIONS OF REGISTERING[ Base: All Not Registered ]

In addition to the main survey’s estimate of non-registration, the Northern Ireland Omnibus

Survey conducted fortnightly by Millward Brown Ulster was utilised to track registration over

April and May, and to provide larger consolidated base numbers for profiling purposes. (A

total of 3,893 Omnibus interviews was accumulated, this sample being representative of the

population aged 18+). Over this 2- month period, the Omnibus suggested some steady

reduction in the level of non-registration and also permitted the following analysis of actual

numbers of non-registrants to be calculated.

MARCH + APRIL OMNIBUS Incidence of Non-registration

Catholic Protestant Total Base 1537 2207 3893 % Pop (K) % Pop (K) % Pop (K) Total 13 61 14 100 14 171 18-24 27 18 30 25 29 46 25-34 17 19 18 26 18 49 35+ 8 24 10 49 9 76 Urban 12 44 14 71 14 115 Rural 13 29 15 29 14 56 ABC1 11 22 11 32 12 61 C2DE 14 39 17 68 16 110

24

(The estimate of percentage non-registered from Omnibus is lower than from the main

survey – this may be related to the different methodology and to the timing of the surveys,

with the May Omnibus surveys producing lower estimates than April).

25

7. VALIDATING REGISTRATION In the focus groups, when asked how those that had registered to vote might validate that

they were indeed registered, the unanimous initial response was that the individual should

wait on the receipt of a polling card. Only in the event of the absence of a polling card when

others had received theirs, would most be alerted to a problem. Given time to consider the

issue, a minority of respondents were aware of the opportunity to check the electoral register

at council offices, although it must be noted that none stated they would bother to do so.

A few individuals considered that if they were concerned about their registration they might

contact their preferred party directly to check if they were registered. Direct contact with the

Electoral Office was the least likely course of action.

‘If you don’t get a card, that’s the bottom line isn’t it?’ Catholic/Nationalist ‘You get your card, a polling card, a voting card… So there is confirmation?’ Protestant/Unionist

26

8. DEMOTIVATORS BEHIND NON-REGISTRATION

8.1 APATHY

Outright apathy was the single most important state of mind explaining lack of registration.

Underlying this apathy were several factors which differentiate between certain demographic

groups.

Firstly there is the apathy of the young, an apathy that is derived from a lack of involvement

in the political sphere. The young are characterised by a focus on personal hedonism which

is accentuated by a life-stage involving minimal personal responsibilities either on a

pecuniary or social basis. The youth culture of the 60’s was associated with a mix of

hedonism and idealism that reflected in a highly politicised youth culture focused on bringing

about societal and political change. The so called generation X associated with the youth of

the mid 80’s onwards has depicted a completely contrary pattern of political interest and

involvement, with the focus on self being totally unfettered by any sense of responsibility

towards others or society in general. Within these young unregistered group members

there was considerable evidence of a self-enforced ignorance of the political sphere, many

suggesting they could better utilise their time employed in other activities rather than

watching the news.

‘I don’t vote because I am not interested. I don’t care who wins and who loses. I asked him yesterday who was the prime minister. Not interested.’

Catholic/Nationalist

Across the full group schedule it might be ventured that the pattern of registration or non-

registration (in so far as it can be inferred from the limited numbers involved) suggests that in

stances where young people continue to live with or in proximity to their parents, the effect of

parental pressure could outweigh this life-stage related apathy. However most of the young

unregistered persons that we had contact with had left the family home and were living on

their own, with partners or other young co-habitants and therefore less influenced by parents

on a day to day basis.

‘I’ve been registered because a member of the family used to put the names down for everyone. Now it’s changed and I haven’t put my name down to vote.’ Protestant/Unionist

27

‘Our auntie and uncle does, every year they vote and I say I don’t vote… Every time there is voting they are there.. you need to vote and all the other people will get your vote and I say so I don’t care.’

Catholic/Nationalist ‘There are a lot of younger families in West Belfast now. The younger people they don’t care like their mums and dads, all they care about is themselves really. All I care about is somebody good getting in to clean up the area and things like that there.’

Catholic/Nationalist It would be wrong to assume that apathy is the terrain solely of the young and whilst the

under 25’s may have dominated the non-registered groups; there were many non-registered

in their 40’s 50’s and 60’s. The difference in the apathy evinced from the older non-

registrants is that it is not underpinned by political ignorance but rather by a disinclination to

participate in the political process. Politics was considered to be insufficiently important to

the individual to instigate the level of personal action now required to register.

General apathy aside, the young expressed a strong sense of alienation from the sectarian

politics of the parties of Northern Ireland. This feeling was strengthened by the stated

impact of EMU (Education for Mutual Understanding) initiatives, the introduction of

integrated education, and a changing society. It should be noted that these sentiments were

most strongly expressed by Protestant groups. Within this context Northern Ireland politics

was criticised as acutely polarised and perceived to be outmoded and the politics of old men,

divorced from young people’s lives.

‘I would say that this generation is a bit more neutral. They’re not as biased so they might not want to vote just for the sake of giving Protestants the vote.’

Protestant/Unionists ‘The young people aren’t as biased. I think the young people coming out of university. They’re not as biased. Religiously, you know what I mean. We should get rid of all those old people.’

Protestant/Unionists

28

8.2 DISAFFECTION

Regardless of age there was evidently a disinterest in politics generally, based mainly on the

perception that politicians had little direct impact on the lives and conditions of local

communities and immediate circles of families and acquaintances. Again, this

demonstrated the very narrow and self-centred horizons of many. This disaffection for

politicians was often rationalised on the grounds that those seeking to serve in public office

were only motivated by personal monetary gain.

‘I used to vote. Me and my husband but I don’t now. I’ve no interest… I mean sure they’re not doing nothing for you. To me they’re just all in it for themselves.’

Protestant/Unionist

‘I think they see what they see on the TV and they see like the education minister now and they done plenty for twenty five years and just gave it up for a good job and a good salary.’

Catholic/Nationalist ‘I know somebody who used to work in the Belfast City Council and he says you would go in; he was a chauffeur, and you’d sit there and you’d wait on them all coming out and they talked about what the wives made them for dinner and hoped the fire alarm would go off so they could get adjourned and get money for it. See behind the scenes what actually goes on you’d wonder and let’s face it, they’re in it for the money.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘What we’re talking about is, Lagan Valley Civic Centre there was £30,000 allocated ……A lot of councillors blocked ( the 247 project) and instead of building an estate park they’d a burst pipe in the Lagan and hence there’s £30,000 burst bloody pipe.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘Do you know what they should do instead of them giving them their big fat pay cheques, they should open up a park in Poleglass or a swimmers or something and give the kids more to do… Michael Ferguson would have the money to do that… The housing officer for Sinn Fein. See every Provo, their houses are gorgeous.’


29

8.3 DISILLUSIONMENT

There was a strong sentiment expressed that politicians do not listen to the electorate and

only engage with the public at times of campaigning for re-election. A sense of

disillusionment was also expressed with the nature of people running as politicians. Once

again this disaffection was most strongly expressed by the Protestant groups. Whilst in part

this reflected abhorrence of the involvement of paramilitary-associated parties having a role

in politics, it also reflects a dismay with individuals with little or no qualifications having a well

paid place in Government.

‘I just don’t think we should put them forward to represent our views when we should have more of a voice ourselves without having to go through them.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘They only come round the doors coming up to election and say they’ll do everything for you and then you don’t see them again after.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘In our area they do nothing for us. Even if you ask them they still don’t do it…. I don’t even know where their offices or anything are. I used to know… I know more about the Sinn Fein offices. Protestant/Unionist ‘Do you see it’s the politicians for me? If I really wanted to vote for somebody I would give my national insurance number. If you felt so strongly about it but I don’t because I’ve no interest in what they are talking about.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘You know what I find hard about it is when you know too much about them as a person. People were like beforehand and what they were capable of and you can’t have a stand for anybody like that standing there saying we’re going to have peace in this country but years ago murdered people themselves, that’s what gets me. That’s my main reason.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘What’s the point because who do you vote for, voting for XXX who lives down the corner at £30,000 a year to sit in the house and they’re asking me to vote for him! You want me to vote for someone that sitting on his arse in the house, catch yourself on,

30

no way. I wish they’d vote for me to sit in the house. I’d do alright. £30,000 a year. A lot of crap. That’s why I didn’t vote.’

Protestant/Unionist In the Poleglass non-registrant group, a distinct anti-establishment sentiment was evident.

This detracted from a willingness to vote for Sinn Fein, as this party was perceived to be the

establishment and at the same time the only potential recipient of votes.

‘There is so many young people around Poleglass as well and they have joyriders and they wouldn’t dream of going out and voting Sinn Fein.’


8.4 ANOMIE

Those respondents who resided in areas that were either strongly nationalist or unionist and

when the prospective voter was of either the same political persuasion or a contrary political

persuasion as that of the area, seemed to feel their vote would be immaterial to the

outcome.

‘I couldn’t be annoyed doing it. It’s just to a whole lot of people it means nothing but whereas all the people that are in Sinn Fein and SDLP and bla, bla, bla, they all care and their families.’


31

9 REGISTRANTS Turning now to those who had actually registered, the research demonstrated that most had

coped very comfortably with the mechanisms for doing so, 79% indicating that the new

process “made no difference” and 18% actually asserted that it had given them “more

encouragement” to register. (Only 3% said that the process had represented “less

encouragement” to register).

IMPACT OF NEW REGISTRATION PROCESSIMPACT OF NEW REGISTRATION PROCESS[ Base: All Registered ]

18%

3%

79%

Moreencouragement

to register

Lessencouragement

to register

Made nodifference

An understanding of the motivations for registration was garnered by inviting registrants to

look at a list of 5 possible factors, and to nominate those which they felt applied in their own

case. The most frequently nominated were:

“I believe that voting is a duty of all citizens”. (50%) “I want to ensure that I can vote at the election”. (47%)

This overall finding demonstrates that there is a high sense of citizenship and social

responsibility in Northern Ireland, bolstered by a desire to be able to exercise one’s

franchise. Factors relating to habit, belief in democracy, and party politics, were less

important. The legislation underlying the new registration process is the Fraud Act 2000,

which specifies that registering to vote is now a legal requirement. (Some democracies,

notably Australia, go further than this and have a legal requirement to vote.) However, the

research demonstrated that there is widespread unawareness of this requirement, rising to a

32

narrow majority of young people, and non-registrants.

MOTIVATION FOR REGISTRATIONMOTIVATION FOR REGISTRATION[ Base: All Registered ]

AGESEX

66

41

35

25

19

52

44

34

27

19

49

50

33

22

17

46

50

40

34

20

39

49

28

21

15

46

49

17

19

24

55

43

35

21

18

45

52

30

31

20

50

47

32

26

19

I believe that voting is a duty of all citizens

I want to ensure that I can vote at the election

Habit – have always registered

I am a firm believer in democracy

I am keen to ensure that the party I support wins the election

%%%%%%%%%


Given the clear evidence that low motivation is a dominant feature in failing to return a

registration form, it is clear that it would be important to reinforce awareness of legal

compliance.

AWARENESS OF LEGAL COMPLIANCEAWARENESS OF LEGAL COMPLIANCE[ Base: All Respondents ]

AGESEX

69

30

71

29

65

35

64

35

55

44

46

54

63

37

61

38

62

37

Yes

No

%%%%%%%%%


Encouragingly, there was widespread public approval of the new registration process, only

6% overall disapproving. These levels of approval were reasonably consistent throughout

33

the community, with the notable exception of Republicans, amongst whom it was clear that

almost all the disapproval resided: however, even amongst this group those approving

(44%) narrowly outweighed those disapproving (28%). (Approval for the new registration

system was virtually identical across the other 3 main ideologies, Nationalist, Unionist, and

Loyalist.)

OVERALL APPROVAL OF OVERALL APPROVAL OF NEW REGISTRATIONNEW REGISTRATION


AGESEX

25

40

20

2

2

10

30

42

12

3

4

8

23

42

20

4

2

9

25

49

15

3

1

6

21

39

25

3

2

11

21

28

26

7

3

15

23

43

20

2

3

10

26

38

19

5

2

10

24

41

20

4

2

10

Strongly approve

Tend to approve

Neither approve nor disapprove

Tend to disapprove

Strongly disapprove

Don’t know

%%%%%%%%%65+55-6445-5435-4425-3418-24FEMALEMALETOTAL



RELIGION

21

37

21

7

3

10

%

CATHOLIC

26

44

18

1

1

10

%

PROTESTANT

24

41

20

4

2

10

Strongly approve

Tend to approve


Tend to disapprove

Strongly disapprove

Don’t know

%

TOTAL

34



IDEOLOGY

21

35

25

6

0

13

29

41

12

3

3

12

21

48

14

0

3

14

29

43

17

1

1

9

23

44

19

4

3

8

9

35

22

16

12

6

24

41

20

4

2

10

Strongly approve

Tend to approve


Tend to disapprove

Strongly disapprove

Don’t know

%%%%%%%


By far the most frequently cited spontaneous reason for approval of the new process was

that it would cut down fraud, followed by more general reasons related to ease of completion

and the acceptability of the procedures. Even non-registrants tended to approve of the

new system, and on similar grounds.

‘My name has been used a few times and I have never voted once. Because there is people that I know done it and used my name and told me they used my name .. they know I don’t vote. They just asked me and I gave them my medical card to do it and they went in with my medical card and used it and voted’

35

10 EASE OR DIFFICULTY OF COMPLETING THE FORM

10.1 UNDERSTANDING THE FORM In developing an opinion on the ease or difficulty presented in completing the electoral

registration form, most focus groups benchmarked the form against benefits forms and

therefore the registration form was perceived as relatively easy to complete.

‘It’s like an application form. Yes, it is easier than an application form. It is things that you ought to know in your head anyway.’

Catholic/Nationalist ‘I didn’t think it was that difficult but I think there was definitely a thing on it about photographic or a passport or drivers licence… that is all I remember. I don’t remember it being awfully complicated to tell you the truth.’


The sectors of society who were expected to have the most difficulty in completing the new

form were anticipated to be the elderly who live alone or those with visual or mental

disabilities.

‘I think there is a lot of elderly people who live alone and maybe just with a home help coming in and out who would maybe just not do anything. Also those people maybe with learning difficulties would have difficulty with it.’

Catholic/Nationalist ‘I think pensioners. Some of them might get those forms and if they don’t have home helps or family coming in, they just ignore them. My father just ignores his. He didn’t even open it and because I’ve no interest in it I didn’t bother explaining it to him.’

Protestant/Unionist The quantitative survey corroborates that the majority of recipients (80%) found it very or

fairly easy to understand, and only 5% found it very or fairly difficult. Amongst those who

had received the form but not bothered returning it, 72% didn’t know whether it was easy or

difficult, another clear indicator that the registration process had not been seen by them as a

particularly high priority, and had been given little attention.

36

EASE OF UNDERSTANDING FORMEASE OF UNDERSTANDING FORMAND INSTRUCTIONSAND INSTRUCTIONS

[ Base: All Received ]

DISABILITYCLASS

49

32

4

3

1

11

%

NONE

35

40

6

8

3

9

%

DE

32

39

8

9

5

7

%

SELF

44

38

7

2

0

9

56

26

4

1

0

12

56

29

2

2

2

10

46

34

5

3

2

10

Very easy

Fairly easy

Neither easy nor difficult

Fairly difficult

Very difficult

Don’t know

%%%%

C2C1ABTOTAL

Further detail on attitudes to the registration process involved respondents considering each

of 8 statements and then stating their agreement or disagreement. Importantly, strongest

agreement emerged for the propositions that ‘’The new registration process was easy to understand’’ (71% agreement) and that ‘’The new system should reduce electoral fraud’’ (70% agreement). Thus, a clear majority of the public have found the system

workable whilst endorsing its core objective. (Only 2% of registrants said that the form had

been returned to them for correction, and virtually all of these had been able to effect the

corrections easily).

There was also majority agreement, albeit more weakly expressed, for ‘’Individual registration seems a sensible approach’’ and ‘’Asking for personal information makes the system more secure’’. For all 4 of these propositions, disagreement was confined to

no more than a few percent in each case. 20% however, disagreed that ‘’Registering to vote is just something you do’’, and there was an even more non-committal approach to

‘’The new system reduced the number of young people on the register’’, in respect of

which the significant finding was that 43% ‘didn’t know’.

37

6

36

35

8

40

30

10

49

29

10

47

26

ATTITUDES TO NEW REGISTRATION ATTITUDES TO NEW REGISTRATION PROCESS PROCESS -- SUMMARYSUMMARY


Strongly agree

Tend to agree

Neither agree nor disagreeTend to disagreeStrongly disagree

NEW PROCESS EASY TO

UNDERSTAND%

SHOULD REDUCE ELECTORAL

FRAUD%

INDIVIDUAL REGISTRATION

SEEMS A SENSIBLE APPROACH

%

ASKING FOR PERSONAL

INFORMATION MAKES SYSTEM MORE SECURE

%

Don’t know 18 18 8 11

42 31 31 52

128

138 24

13

30

52

Opinion was also somewhat divided on whether the old system had been preferable, and

again very few expressed their opinions strongly either way, indicating only weak resistance

to the new system. Weakest overall agreement was reserved for the statement

‘’Registering to vote is a waste of time’’ a further reflection of the perceived importance of

exercising one’s franchise.

6

41

25

17

154

24

138

74 3

ATTITUDES TO NEW REGISTRATION ATTITUDES TO NEW REGISTRATION PROCESS PROCESS -- SUMMARYSUMMARY


Strongly agree

Tend to agree


REGISTERING TO VOTE IS JUST

SOMETHING YOU DO%

REDUCED NUMBER OF

YOUNG PEOPLE ON THE REGISTER

%

OLD HOUSEHOLD SYSTEM

PREFERABLE%

REGISTERING TO VOTE IS A

WASTE OF TIME

%

Don’t know 4 43 18 4

This attitudinal data enabled an evaluation of the attitudinal differentiation between those

who had actually registered, and those who had not registered. This was done by looking at

the variance between these attitudinal statements, and it emerged that this variance was

38

greatest in respect of ‘’The new registration process was easy to understand’’ and

‘’Registering to vote is a waste of time’’.

ATTITUDES TO NEW REGISTRATION PROCESSATTITUDES TO NEW REGISTRATION PROCESS

63

9

37

10

19

22

59

38

3

2

11

2

5

7

38

11

2.7

3.6

2.7

2.8

2.2

2.3

2.8

2

1.7

4.5

3.4

2.2

1.8

1.9

3.2

1.8

New process easy to understand

Registering to vote is a waste of time

Old household system preferable

Registering to vote is just something you do

Individual registration seems sensible

Asking for personal information makes systems more secure

Reduced number of young people on register

Should reduce electoral fraud

DON’T KNOWMEAN SCORE

REG

ISTE

RED

NO

T R

EGIS

TER

ED

REG

ISTE

RED

NO

T R

EGIS

TER

ED

+1

-0.9

-0.7

+0.6

+0.4

+0.4

-0.7

0.2

VAR

IAN

CE

This demonstrates quite simply that non-registrants both find the system a little more

complex, and are less concerned about voting, than their registered counterparts. This

relative indifference of non-registrants was also revealed by their high incidence of ‘don’t

know’ responses to many of these attitudinal questions.

39

10.2 NATIONAL INSURANCE NUMBER

The concept of a National Insurance Number was universally understood, as was the fact

that it was as unique to each individual as a fingerprint. These respondents expressed

general incredulity that locating National Insurance Number would pose a difficulty to

anyone. It was stated that many young people carry their National Insurance card on their

person and indeed many even knew the number by heart. Furthermore, those in receipt of

benefits were also aware that their number was printed on virtually all documentation

concerning their benefit.

In fact, to emphasise this point there was only one incidence of anyone knowing someone

who did not know their National Insurance Number.

‘Cause everybody’s National Insurance Number is like their fingerprints. It is individual so it is. There could be two people with eth same name living in the same house but your National Insurance Number will split them two people up automatically.’

Catholic/Nationalist ‘It is obviously designed to get more up- front of the person that is going to vote and know exactly that it is you that is going to do the voting. It is to stop obviously fraud or something like that. As much information of the person that is going to vote as possible.’

Catholic/Nationalist Some individuals expressed concern that seeking this information was too personal and too

much information could be gleaned about that person. However, in reality only one person

failed to register as a consequence of being asked for their National Insurance Number.

‘I don’t like the way it has happened the way you have to give your National Insurance Number. There is too many of your personal details and that is why I didn’t register this time…. Your National Insurance Number is that not just a confirmation of who you are. They are not trying to get personal are they? It is but it is still personal. You don’t know who gets that. You don’t know is going to get their hands on the information. Because there is thousands of people who work for them.’

Protestant/Unionist

40

‘Maybe make a documentary to show people what is happening, how it goes on. We know nothing about where do your details go, who handles this, showing you what happens to the form.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘My mummy. She would probably read it and see the National Insurance Number and all the details that you have to fill in and there is nothing I mean to say that it went somewhere else or something… Maybe somebody might not want to give that sort of information out for somebody could go and get a bank account out in your name. If they got all of those details.’

Catholic/Nationalist Where there was concern or projected concern over providing your National Insurance

Number, this concern focused on a perception of joined up Government and the sharing of

information. The element of concern here being less to do with Big Brother but more to do

with what an individual within the public sector, having access to that information, might be

tempted to do.

10.3 INDIVIDUAL SIGNATURE Generally, it was believed that provision of an individual signature was not an issue,

although one group did express concern over the potential abuse of the third party signature.

Certainly, there was no concern or particular animosity towards the notion of having a

signature checked at the polling station at the time of voting.

‘You see this one, the signature. It says you must sign this form unless you are not capable, otherwise get someone to sign it for you, what does that mean? That sounds a bit dodgy … I understand the meaning behind it but just say you don’t want to vote, I mean somebody could sign it for you and you’d lose your vote.’

Protestant/Unionist ‘They should do it the way they do it with us at university. You have your name, signature and then you have to sign it at the side and they check to see if the signatures match.'

Protestant/Unionist

41

10.4 IDENTIFICATION CARD

Respondents displayed a considerable amount of sympathy, if not a latent demand for this

initiative. However, there was some confusion as to whether only the electoral ID card and

no other document would suffice as proof of identity. Regarding this issue, there were only

two concerns expressed: the actual cost of supplying the photographs, and the ease with

which those who were less mobile or the more elderly members of society could organise to

have photographs taken.

During the course of the groups there was only one person who had been aware of the

existence of mobile photographic ID units.

Despite the sympathy with the introduction of photographic ID as a means of improving the

validation of voter eligibility and counteracting personation, many of the groups evoked a

degree of scepticism over the extent to which a system could be completely fool-proof.

‘But sure you can still say you’re somebody else cause it is easy to get a forged driving license or a forged passport or something… I know people that have got them forged driving license. All you have to do is give someone a photo and they will just print it off for you.’

Protestant/Unionist Given the balance of the qualitative research towards non-registrants it is hardly surprising

that few of the respondents had personal experiences of applying for the electoral ID card.

Two individuals had actually applied for photographic ID, one of whom mistakenly

anticipated she might need an ID card as she was recently married and her driver’s license

and passport still remained in her maiden name. This individual had completed the form and

attended a mobile unit, but at the time of the group had not yet received the card. The other

individual who had applied for an ID card, had received a second form for the ID card and

had not bothered to pursue the application, for no reason other than apathy: the bother

involved in completing a further form outweighed this individual’s interest in politics and

voting.

A further individual had not applied personally for an electoral identity card but knew

someone who had: at the time of the focus group they were unsure as to the outcome of the

application.

42

An unanticipated reaction to the electoral ID card was that several younger group members

commented on an additional benefit of the possession of an official photographic ID card as

proof of age for entry into clubs and bars.

‘ I have no interest in voting at all and I wouldn’t even register and I am going to send away for the card for the ID, just to have the photographic ID… because I haven’t got photographic ID and just in case I ever need it…. In case she goes to the off-licence.’

Catholic/Nationalist ‘Can I say one thing about the wee cards? As I said earlier my brother got one and the only reason he got that was for ID, not for voting. Just to prove his age to go out.’

Protestant/Unionist

10.5 EDITED REGISTER There was little understanding of what this concept might be, even amongst the registered

groups. It was clear that no-one had read the notes that accompanied the form. When

further probed, respondents believed it may have something to do with the Data Protection

Act. In fact, respondents had to be informed it was a means of avoiding junk mail. The

connection between the electoral register and commercial practices came as a significant

and unpalatable shock to most, the predominant reaction being voting is a highly private and

confidential matter and thus that any information given in the context of voting should be

sacrosanct, and there was a tendency to mistakenly connect information provided to indicate

eligibility to vote and actual voting information.

‘You want to give your vote but you don’t want people to know who you voted, if you know what I mean. Is that the way it is?’

Protestant/Unionist

‘Yes, it is because you get to choose if you want them to see your name and address and all. Cause I wouldn’t want my name and address being viewed but then again I would want a catalogue and all.’


43

The registered Protestant group expressed concern that as all political parties have copies of

the electoral register, those individuals in the general population who had or were currently

working for the security forces might have some anxiety with being listed.

‘You don’t want your personal details kept. Nobody can go on the voters thing and find out all your details, is that what that means…. Your National Insurance Number, name and address.’

Protestant/Unionist

10.6 NATIONALITY

The subject of nationality provoked considerable concern amongst Catholic registered males

and to a lesser extent amongst Protestant non-registered males. It was perceived as a

means to covertly ascertain the likely weight of the nationalist/unionist vote in advance of the

election.

There was a very real concern over the potential for gerrymandering to minimise the

nationalist vote.

‘Well if you’re starting an election strategy, you know how many nationalities are in so obviously you know how many people are registered to vote and what nationality they are. It gives the Protestant community a better idea of what the outcome of the elections are going to be cause they know how many people are registered to vote in Northern Ireland. They know their nationality therefore whenever you go.’

Catholic/Nationalist ‘Like they may as well say are you a Catholic or a Protestant you know and it is totally irrelevant. It should be totally irrelevant.’

Catholic/Nationalist ‘The difference between saying you’re British or you are Irish, even a British or Irish passports kind of thing, like if you turn round and say you are British on that, I don’t know what way to put this …. They know you’re a unionist voter, is that what you mean… Yes, like they could do anything with your vote. What happens if somebody British wanted to vote for somebody on the other side? Then somebody got hold of that information’. Protestant/Unionist

44

11 VOTING ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR

Attitudes to voting were determined by inviting respondents to express their agreement with

a series of relevant statements. The most widespread agreement was expressed in respect

of “I think everyone should use their vote”, and “I feel it is my duty to vote at Northern Ireland Assembly Elections”. Thus, despite the residual 19% of the population with a high

degree of inertia in respect of registering, it is clear that the community as a whole retains a

well developed sense of citizenship and social conscience.

“Voting at Assembly Elections is a good way to have your say”, also received

widespread agreement, albeit slightly more weakly expressed, indicating some reservations

about the institutional relevance of the Assembly.

12

30

51

11

33

46

12

42

36

15

28

19

19

29

15

ATTITUDES TO VOTING IN ATTITUDES TO VOTING IN MAY ASSEMBLY ELECTION MAY ASSEMBLY ELECTION -- SUMMARYSUMMARY


Strongly agree

Tend to agree


I THINK EVERYONE

SHOULD USE THEIR VOTE

%

Don’t know 2 1 3 9 20

I FEEL IT IS MY DUTY TO VOTE AT NI ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS

%

VOTING AT ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS IN A GOOD

WAY TO HAVE YOUR

SAY%

IF YOU DON’T VOTE – SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT

STEAL YOUR VOTE

%

TRADITIONALLY ELECTIONS IN MY AREA ARE

VERY CLOSELY FOUGHT

%

32 63 53 19

11

143

That concerns about fraud are widespread is revealed by the 47% who agree that “if you don’t vote, someone else might steal your vote”, and indeed Northern Ireland has many

anecdotal references to voters arriving at polling stations to find their name already crossed

off the list.

There appears to be a considerable body of political evidence that voting behaviour in

Northern Ireland is heavily influenced by the intensity of the contest at individual

45

constituency level. It was therefore of some interest to find that 44% of the population

consider that “traditionally elections in my area are very closely fought”. When this finding was cross-analysed against propensity to vote, a pronounced correlation

was observed, with those in closely fought areas demonstrating a much higher inclination to

turn out on polling day than their counterparts living in areas where the election was

regarded as representing a “safe seat” or otherwise foregone conclusion.

There was majority disagreement with the proposition that “the only reason I would vote is to keep the other side out”, a broad indicator of non-tactical voting behaviour. Although

19% agreed that “I don’t believe that voting at Assembly Elections makes much difference”, 64% disagreed. Over recent years there has been speculation that

disillusionment with politics is responsible for alienation and consequent low turnouts, but

this finding indicates that the Assembly Election (originally scheduled for May but

subsequently postponed indefinitely), maintains considerable credibility. Only 10% agreed

that “I can’t be bothered to vote” and the 53% who strongly disagreed with this proposition

clearly comprise the core of dependable and regular voters.

20

1210

13

136

86 4

88

3

74 2

ATTITUDES TO VOTING IN ATTITUDES TO VOTING IN MAY ASSEMBLY ELECTION MAY ASSEMBLY ELECTION -- SUMMARYSUMMARY


Strongly agree

Tend to agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Tend to disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know 3 4 2 3 4

THE ONLY REASON I

WOULD VOTE IS TO KEEP THE OTHER SIDE OUT

%

I DON’T BELIEVE VOTING AT ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS

MAKES MUCH OF A

DIFFERENCE%

I CAN’T BE BOTHERED

TO VOTE%

BOTHERING TO VOTE IS

POINTLESS BECAUSE ONE

PERSON’S VOTE WON’T MAKE ANY

DIFFERENCE%

IT IS DIFFICULT TO GET TO THE

POLLING STATION

%

29

26

36

28

27

53

32

47

28

55

The remainder (35%), either tended to agree or had no particular view, and are likely to

comprise those who would vote on occasion, depending on the nature of the election and

their own personal willingness at that time. There was also sound disagreement with the

notion that “bothering to vote is pointless because one person’s vote won’t make any

46

difference’’: 11% agreed, indicating that a significant feature of the political disengagement

of this minority is related to the futile sophistry behind this perception.

More encouragement can be drawn from the widespread disagreement that “it is difficult to get to the polling station”. Only 6% agreed that this was the case, and these were

concentrated amongst the elderly (65+), and those who had some form of disability,

although even amongst these 2 segments of the population, agreement rose to only 18%

and 17% respectively.

As with the findings on attitudes to the new registration process, the differentiation in voting

attitudes between those who had actually registered, and those who had not registered. was

evaluated. This was done by looking at the variance between these attitudinal statements,

and it emerged that this variance was greatest for “I can’t be bothered to vote”, and “I feel it is my duty to vote at Northern Ireland Assembly Elections”. This clearly indicates the

substantial gulf in apathy and engagement with politics between those who have registered

and those who have yet failed to do so. In particular, non-registrants have clearly not

responded to the power-sharing arrangements set up under the Good Friday Agreement.

ATTITUDES TO VOTING IN ATTITUDES TO VOTING IN MAY ASSEMBLY ELECTIONMAY ASSEMBLY ELECTION

MEAN SCORE

3.2

2.7

2.6

2.4

3.1

3.5

3.1

4.2

3.6

2.5

4.5

1.6

1.7

1.5

3.9

4.3

2.6

4.4

3.5

2.5

I can’t be bothered to vote

I feel it is my duty to vote at Northern Ireland Assembly Election

Voting at Assembly Elections is a good way to have your say

I think everyone should use their vote

I don’t believe voting at Assembly Elections makes much of a difference

Bothering to vote is pointless because one person’s vote won’t make any difference

If you don’t vote – someone else might steal your vote

It is difficult to get to the polling station

The only reason I would vote is to keep the other side out

Traditionally elections in my area are very closely fought

REG

ISTE

RED

NO

T R

EGIS

TER

ED

-1.3

+1.1

+0.9

+0.9

-0.8

-0.8

+0.5

-0.2

+0.1

0

VAR

IAN

CE

47

Overall, 41% said they were “certain to vote” at the next Assembly Election, and 27% said

they were “very likely to do so”. These figures relate very closely to actual turnouts at

Northern Ireland elections when around 4 in 10 can always be relied on to vote regardless of

the issues at stake or imponderables such as the weather, with turnouts peaking at around

68% when the “very likelies” also vote in elections of particular political significance.

There was no significant gender difference in voting propensity, but those from AB

backgrounds evinced a higher propensity to vote than other socio-economic classes,

particularly DE (73% to 64%).

LIKELIHOOD OF VOTING IN LIKELIHOOD OF VOTING IN MAY 2003 ASSEMBLY ELECTIONMAY 2003 ASSEMBLY ELECTION


CLASSSEX

40

30

13

5

7

6

%

FEMALE

42

24

13

6

8

7

%

MALE

40

24

13

6

7

9

%

DE

41

30

13

5

7

4

38

32

13

5

7

5

47

26

10

4

8

5

41

27

13

5

7

6

Certain to vote

Very likely to vote

Quite likely to vote

Not very likely to vote

Certain not to vote

Don’t know

%%%%

C2C1ABTOTAL

Regionally, those in the “South” area (Down and Armagh) also showed a reduced

propensity to vote, and Protestants were marginally more likely to vote than Catholics

(notwithstanding their relatively low registration behaviour).

48



RELIGIONAREA

39

28

13

4

9

7

%

CATHOLIC

42

27

15

4

6

6

%

WEST

44

29

11

5

6

6

%

PROTESTANT

37

26

15

5

11

5

39

31

13

4

8

4

45

27

6

7

4

10

41

27

13

5

7

6

Certain to vote

Very likely to vote



Certain not to vote

Don’t know

%%%%

SOUTHNORTHBELFASTTOTAL

When propensity to vote in the Assembly Election was analysed by political ideology, it was

observed that the highest propensity to vote was expressed by Republicans, appreciably

ahead of Nationalists in this regard. At the other end of the spectrum those showing easily

the lowest propensity to vote were those (comprising 25% of the total population), who

preferred to describe themselves as not having any particular political ideology: of this group

only 27% said they would be certain to vote.

‘I think Catholics tend more to vote because of what they’re striving for and that. They would be told from a young age this is what we’re aiming for.’

49



IDEOLOGY

27

28

15

8

14

9

52

24

9

2

6

7

46

21

13

11

2

7

46

30

12

3

5

5

41

28

14

6

6

5

57

21

6

2

6

9

41

27

13

5

7

6

Certain to vote

Very likely to vote



Certain not to vote

Don’t know

%%%%%%%


Amongst those who had already actually registered, the propensity to vote not surprisingly

improved to 49% being certain to vote and 29% very likely to vote. Interestingly, one-third

of non –registrants said they were certain or very likely to vote in the Assembly elections:

whilst most of these are likely to be procrastinators with intentions of registering, it is

conceivable that some may not have realized that they are now ineligible to vote.

Perhaps the strongest correlation with voting propensity however, lay in whether the voter

was in a tightly contested area. Amongst those who said they were in a closely fought area

or constituency, 56% said they were certain to vote, whereas amongst those who were in

“foregone conclusion” constituencies, only 29% said they were certain to vote.

50



ELECTIONS IN AREA

29

31

15

7

9

9

56

23

9

3

5

4

49

29

11

3

5

3

41

27

13

5

7

6

Certain to vote

Very likely to vote



Certain not to vote

Don’t know

%%%%

NOT CLOSELY FOUGHT

CLOSELY FOUGHTREGISTEREDTOTAL

Spontaneously, apathy and personal disinterest in politics were by far the most frequently

volunteered reasons for not voting, whilst other minority reasons included resentment of

inter-party disputation (5%), being on holiday (3%), being housebound (2%), being

previously refused at a polling station (2%), intimidation (1%), and lack of ID (1%).

‘I don’t vote because I am not interested. I don’t care who wins and who loses’

‘In our area they (politicians) do nothing for us. Even if you ask them they still don’t do it… I don’t even know where their offices or anything are.’

This voting propensity was closely reflected by the frequency of voting across different types

of elections, with very little difference between local council elections and UK general

elections. However, there was clearly less enthusiasm for voting at European elections.

51

FREQUENCY OF VOTING FREQUENCY OF VOTING -- SUMMARYSUMMARY[ Base: All Respondents ]

43

18

9

7

18

2

4

52

21

9

3

13

1

2

54

22

8

3

10

1

2

Always

Usually

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

It depends

Don’t know

EUROPEAN ELECTIONS

%

UK GENERAL ELECTIONS

%

LOCAL COUNCIL ELECTIONS

%

When invited to say how interested they might be in news of the forthcoming Assembly

Elections, only 16% said they were “very interested” and 36% were “fairly interested”, a

total of 52%. The remaining half of the population were uninterested. Men showed rather

more interest than women, and there was a very sharp age correlation, interest waxing

amongst the over 50’s, but falling to very low levels amongst the 18 to 24 year olds

INTEREST IN ASSEMBLY ELECTION NEWSINTEREST IN ASSEMBLY ELECTION NEWS[ Base: All Respondents ]

AGESEX

20

37

28

14

1

23

48

17

10

2

16

41

21

22

1

16

34

32

17

1

13

32

25

29

1

6

29

30

35

0

13

35

30

21

1

19

38

22

21

1

16

36

26

21

1

Very interested

Fairly interested

Not particularly interested

Not at all interested

Don’t know

%%%%%%%%%


. These low levels of expressed interest appear almost at odds with the sharp increase in

newspaper sales which typically occurs during the run up to an election, but nevertheless

52

reflect a considerable degree of weariness with the apparent intractability, controversy and

animosity of Northern Ireland elections. The high media uptake is likely to be more on a

“need to know” than “wish to know” basis.

53

12 REGISTRATION ID

Towards the end of the interview, respondents were invited to discuss their awareness of the

new forms of identification which were relevant. 73% overall said that they were aware of

these forms, rising to 82% of those already registered, but falling to 45% of the unregistered.

The great majority of respondents were subsequently able to correctly cite one or other of

the forms of ID which would be acceptable when going to vote, but there were also

significant numbers citing forms of ID which would be unacceptable.

AWARENESS OF NEW FORMS OF AWARENESS OF NEW FORMS OF IDENTIFICATIONIDENTIFICATION


APPLIED ELECTORAL IDREGISTERED

45

42

13

%

NO

80

13

7

83

11

6

82

11

7

73

19

8

Yes

No

Don’t know

%%%%

NOYESYESTOTAL

54

AWARENESS OF ACCEPTABLE IDAWARENESS OF ACCEPTABLE ID[ Base: All Respondents ]

8478

5036

2017

15141313

1110

654

1

60

Driving licenceBritish passport

Electoral Identity CardIrish Passport

Provisional driving licenceTranslink Senior Smartpass

Medical cardBus pass

Allowances / pensions bookOther European Community (EC) Passport

Social security bookStudent card (NUS)

Plastic National Insurance CardBritish Seaman's card

Bank cardOther

No ID neededDon't know

TOTAL%

In respect of which form of ID they actually intended to use, driving licences emerged as by

far the most frequent, followed by British passports. 9% said they would use an Electoral Identity Card, 5% an Irish passport, 2% a Translink Senior Smartpass and 2% a

provisional driving licence, all of which would be valid. However, 5% of those currently

registered asserted that they would come equipped with an invalid form of ID, including a

social security book, a pension book, ordinary bus pass or a medical card.

ID INTEND TO USEID INTEND TO USE[ Base: All Respondents ]

5417

74

222211

16

000000

Driving licenceBritish Passport

Electoral Identity CardIrish Passport

Translink Senior SmartpassProvisional driving licence

Social security bookAllowances / pensions book

Bus passMedical card

Bank cardOther European Community (EC) Passport

British Seaman's cardPlastic National Insurance Card

Student card (NUS)Other

No ID neededWon't vote / unlikely to vote

TOTAL%

REGISTERED

4118212233120000000

20

58179522112100000011

NO%

YES%

55

Numerically, this amounts to 47,000 registered who might arrive at the polling booth bearing

an unacceptable form of registration. Demographic analysis of these 47,000 reveals that

they are heavily concentrated in the DE segment of the community, not in employment, twice

as likely to be female as male, and living in Housing Executive estates.

When registering, a facility is incorporated (primarily for those without any existing form of

photographic ID), to apply for a special electoral photographic ID by ticking “Box 9” on the

registration form. 15% of those who had completed the form indicated that they had ticked

Box 9: 11% had subsequently received the Electoral ID application form, and 9% had

completed and returned this form. Thus, within the 15% who had ticked Box 9, 6% had

failed to return an Electoral ID application form, and these were almost evenly divided

between not ever having received this form, and receiving it but not bothering to complete it.

The most salient characteristic of those who had failed to return an ID application for

whatever reason was that they were heavily concentrated in the DE segment of the

population.

REQUESTED ELECTORAL ID (BOX 9)REQUESTED ELECTORAL ID (BOX 9)[ Base: All Registered ]

11

74

16

10

1

7

3

C1%

8

81

11

5

3

5

0

AB%

13

71

17

9

3

5

4

C2%

15

70

15

11

4

9

3

TOTAL REGISTERED

%

24

62

14

18

6

15

3

Yes

No

Don’t know

Yes

No

Yes

No

REQUESTED

RECEIVED

COMPLETED

DE%

CLASS

The reasons for not returning Electoral ID application forms were partially procrastination,

but it was also found that about one-third already said they have some form of acceptable ID

(and hence had not needed to tick Box 9 in the first instance).

‘I think everybody should have that wee card anyway whether you’ve ID or not … Cause people can forge anything these days.’

56

‘I have no interest in voting at all and I wouldn’t even register and I was going to send away for the card for the ID, just to have photographic ID ..’

REASONS FOR NOT RETURNING REASONS FOR NOT RETURNING ELECTORAL ID APPLICATIONELECTORAL ID APPLICATION

[ Base: All Not Returned ]

34

34

14

5

4

0

4

5

Haven't got round to ityet / been busy

Already have othersuitable ID

Lost it

Couldn't be bothered

Applied at ID centreinstead

Don't intend voting

Other

Don't know / not sure

TOTAL%

It therefore appears that significant numbers of registrants tick Box 9 either in a rather

indeterminate manner, or even to obtain an alternative form of ID to one which they already

possess. Only half of those who said they had applied for Electoral ID said that they actually

intended to return the form.

INTENTION TO APPLY FOR ELECTORAL IDINTENTION TO APPLY FOR ELECTORAL ID[ Base: All Not Returned ]

51%

35%

14%

Yes

No

Don't know

57

•

•

•

In summary, the estimates of absolute numbers of people in Northern Ireland without

acceptable photographic ID are estimated at 84,000, of whom:

20,000 ticked Box 9

23,000 did not tick Box 9

40,000 have not yet completed a registration form

The other “tick box” facility on the registration form was Box 5, which allowed registrants to

be excluded from the edited register. 15% recalled having definitely ticked the box; 42%

recalled not having ticked the box; but 43% could not remember. As with Box 9, this finding

strongly suggests that many registrants have paid a very low level of attention to ticking

these boxes, suggesting that they were either unclear about their purpose, or considered

them of little relevance.

Yes15%

No42%

Don't know43%

EXCLUDED FROM EDITED REGISTER (BOX 5)EXCLUDED FROM EDITED REGISTER (BOX 5)[ Base: All Registered ]

‘I can’t actually remember but I would say I probably did tick it.’

prepared for: the electoral commission...‘it’s just some people have been voting twice or 3...

Documents