asked the Minister for Local Government the total number of postal votes on the current electoral registers in Donegal-Leitrim and South County Dublin; if he is aware that the political parties generally are aware of the precise number of such votes cast in the recent by-elections and of the total number of such votes cast for each candidate; and if he regards this practice as being in accordance with current electoral law and in the public interest generally, more particularly as members of the Garda and Army are directly involved.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Postal Votes.
38.
The total number of postal voters on the current register of electors for the constituency of Donegal-Leitrim is 142 and for the constituency of South County Dublin is 411. My attention has been drawn to the statement which appeared in some Dublin newspapers on Thursday, 3rd December, purporting to give detailed results of the postal voting at the by-election in the Donegal-Leitrim constituency. I do not know the source of this statement. In accordance with the electoral law all the ballot papers, including postal ballot papers, for a constituency are thoroughly mixed before the votes are counted and there is no question of counting the votes cast by postal voters separately or of ascertaining and announcing a separate result in respect of them.
The electoral law prescribes an elaborate procedure for dealing with postal voters' papers designed to preserve the secrecy of the postal ballot and at the same time eliminate any abuses. Among other things this procedure requires the returning officer at some time between the close of the poll and the start of the count to check the documents returned by postal voters—that is, the ballot paper, ballot paper receipt and ballot paper envelope—to ensure their authenticity. Agents of candidates are entitled to be present at this process. I agree that publication of statements of the kind referred to is not desirable and returning officers have been advised to carry out the check of the postal papers in such a way that the trend of the postal vote is not apparent to agents present.
Is the Minister aware that for a number of years past it seems to have been common practice at election counts for staffs of returning officers to empty boxes separately onto separate tables, taking each area separately, including a separate emptying of postal vote boxes onto separate tables, thus enabling those at counts to have a precise knowledge of where each postal vote went in each town-land and each area, thus generally violating the alleged secrecy of counts? Will he take urgent steps to ensure that this kind of odious practice does not occur in the future?
The recommendation is that ballot papers be kept face downwards while checking.
(Cavan): In regard to postal votes, is it not a fact that part of the regulation is that postal votes should be opened face downwards, as the Minister has just said, while other votes are opened face upwards? Will the Minister agree that if the information which came from Donegal-Leitrim is accurate, the count of the postal votes must have been carried out in breach of the regulations because otherwise the information could not be available?
The same thing occurred in South County Dublin.
The returning officer is a statutory officer and I have no power to direct him in the discharge of his duties. His duties are laid down clearly.
(Cavan): Will the Minister agree with me that if the regulations were carried out and the postal votes were opened face downwards, this information could not be available?
One could assume that but there is another assumption possible as to how this information became available.
In view of the regulation which stipulates that the votes should be properly mixed prior to counting will the Minister issue a general directive to returning officers that prior to votes being distributed from the boxes onto separate tables they will be mixed from all the boxes and brought in batches to separate tables?
I do not know if the Deputy would get general agreement for that recommendation.
(Cavan): That would not be possible.
Is it not a fact that what has been described here today is what all practising politicians do at each election, not at the counting of votes, but at the checking of votes? Since it is available to everybody and it is their own fault if they do not do it, I cannot see that there is very much wrong with it.
I would agree that it is not fair to have this practice carried out when counting postal votes.
(Cavan): I take it the Minister agrees that the counting of postal votes is totally different from the counting of others because there may be only 30 or 40 votes from a known group of people. The Minister should see to it that these votes are checked strictly in accordance with the regulations.
Could the Minister explain his statement that he has no function in the matter because the returning officer is the statutory officer? Does this mean that the returning officer can breach the law and no action can be taken to ensure that he does not do it again?
No.
What procedure is to be adopted to ensure that the returning officers do not breach the law in this respect?
Under the legislation the returning officer is the person who is responsible for conducting the count. The regulations and recommendations that issue from the Department are known to each returning officer. The Minister cannot be expected to be present at each count to ensure that these recommendations are carried out.
Question No. 39.
We must get to the bottom of this.
We must get to the end of questions.
(Cavan): Is there any regulation which provides that their fees will be withheld if the regulations are not carried out?
I would not be aware of that.
Will the Minister warn the returning officers?
Mr. J. Lenehan
Was it not you who introduced it? What are you talking about?
Order.
Will the Minister give that warning?
There is no need for a warning. There is no need to wave the big stick.
There is if the regulation is being breached.
Question No. 39.