Recounting recounts

[yellowperil]

I was wondering if we could discuss the electoral equivalent of penalty shootouts -the agony & ecstasy of close calls. In an earlier post I mentioned Yeovil GE 1945 -a Conservative majority of 174 and no recount asked for- how small a majority can anyone conceive of without recourse to a recount?? How many recounts should be permissable? - This gets personal as I once lost a CC election on the basis of best of 5 -and against the council leader to give it added frisson.

 Does the returning officer have too much/ too little leeway in what is permitted?

( I had once thought this might be a pertinent debate in the light of the last two parliamentary by-elections but in the event they both moved well away from recount territory so that's only a what might have been) 

[Adrian]

Feb 28, 2017 16:51:01 GMT yellowperil said:

I was wondering if we could discuss the electoral equivalent of penalty shootouts -the agony & ecstasy of close calls. In an earlier post I mentioned Yeovil GE 1945 -a Conservative majority of 174 and no recount asked for- how small a majority can anyone conceive of without recourse to a recount?? How many recounts should be permissable? - This gets personal as I once lost a CC election on the basis of best of 5 -and against the council leader to give it added frisson.

 Does the returning officer have too much/ too little leeway in what is permitted?

( I had once thought this might be a pertinent debate in the light of the last two parliamentary by-elections but in the event they both moved well away from recount territory so that's only a what might have been) 

In 2017 manual counting shouldn't be necessary. We don't mark multiple-choice exam papers manually - the technology is quite basic now and should be provided to every council for vote counting.

[Andrew_S]

Feb 28, 2017 16:51:01 GMT yellowperil said:

I was wondering if we could discuss the electoral equivalent of penalty shootouts -the agony & ecstasy of close calls. In an earlier post I mentioned Yeovil GE 1945 -a Conservative majority of 174 and no recount asked for- how small a majority can anyone conceive of without recourse to a recount?? How many recounts should be permissable? - This gets personal as I once lost a CC election on the basis of best of 5 -and against the council leader to give it added frisson.

 Does the returning officer have too much/ too little leeway in what is permitted?

( I had once thought this might be a pertinent debate in the light of the last two parliamentary by-elections but in the event they both moved well away from recount territory so that's only a what might have been) 

I'm curious to know how you know there wasn't a recount in Yeovil in 1945.

AFAIK the Tories were granted a recount in 1997 in Lancaster & Wyre despite the Labour majority being over 1,200 votes. Also I think Oona King was refused a recount in Bethnal Green & Bow in 2005 despite being less than 900 votes behind George Galloway.

[finsobruce]

Feb 28, 2017 18:09:04 GMT Andrew_S said:

Feb 28, 2017 16:51:01 GMT yellowperil said:

I was wondering if we could discuss the electoral equivalent of penalty shootouts -the agony & ecstasy of close calls. In an earlier post I mentioned Yeovil GE 1945 -a Conservative majority of 174 and no recount asked for- how small a majority can anyone conceive of without recourse to a recount?? How many recounts should be permissable? - This gets personal as I once lost a CC election on the basis of best of 5 -and against the council leader to give it added frisson.

 Does the returning officer have too much/ too little leeway in what is permitted?

( I had once thought this might be a pertinent debate in the light of the last two parliamentary by-elections but in the event they both moved well away from recount territory so that's only a what might have been) 

I'm curious to know how you know there wasn't a recount in Yeovil in 1945.

yellowperil was there - to judge from his previous post.

[J.G.Harston]

I don't think this is a hard rule, but in Sheffield the rule of thumb has been two recounts with the same total/lead, or two recounts where the change is in the same direction resulting in the same candidate winning.

Eg, a/b/c/400/405 followed by a/b/c/400/405, declared
Eg, a/b/c/400/405 followed by a/b/c/400/407 followed by a/b/c/400/408, declared

I've been present at two close recounts, Sheffield Central GE in 2010 where from memory the Labour lead went 175, 165, 165; and last year West Ecclesfield where the lead went 1,-1,0,0,0 coin toss.

[Andrew_S]

There may not have been a recount in Birmingham Hodge Hill in 2004 despite the LDs only being 460 votes behind Labour:

www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/jul/16/uk.liberaldemocrats

[overthehill]

I was wondering if we could discuss the electoral equivalent of penalty shootouts -the agony & ecstasy of close calls. In an earlier post I mentioned Yeovil GE 1945 -a Conservative majority of 174 and no recount asked for- how small a majority can anyone conceive of without recourse to a recount?? How many recounts should be permissable? - This gets personal as I once lost a CC election on the basis of best of 5 -and against the council leader to give it added frisson.

Does the returning officer have too much/ too little leeway in what is permitted?

( I had once thought this might be a pertinent debate in the light of the last two parliamentary by-elections but in the event they both moved well away from recount territory so that's only a what might have been) \

Interested! How do you know there was no recount asked for in Yeovil?

Read more: vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/9247/recounting-recounts?page=1#ixzz4a0ybuvdC

[johnloony]

In Croydon Central in 2005 there were 2 or 3 recounts, depending on how you define the word. The first one was a sort-of bundle check and the others were full recounts. The margin of victory in each was 121, 105, 75, 75. The main changes were ballot papers being rejected because they lacked the official mark - which in those days was a set of perforated holes punched at the edge of the paper, rather than a printed barcode. A lot of the scrutiny was of papers which were frayed or torn at the edge (postal votes frayed by the inside of the envelope, perhaps). In other words, minimal numbers were in the wrong piles or allocated to the wrong candidate. (Although my votes went up from 190 to 193).

In Croydon Central in 2015 the first count was 167, and a bundle check revised it to 165. The Returning Officer said that a full recount would need to wait for a fresh team of counters and a delay of 4 or 5 hours, so the Labour candidate accepted the result at that point.

In Croydon Ashburton ward in the local election in 2014, the smallest winning margin was 8; I think it was 10 in the first count and I think there was only 1 recount.

Whether to have a recount or not is not just a question of how close the top two candidates are. There might be a big discrepancy between the verification stage total and the counted stage total, or there might be other factors to indicate doubt about the correctness of the result. If the margin in the first count is 1,000 or more, it might be appropriate to have a bundle check to make sure that there isn't a bundle of 100 or 200 in the wrong pile.

[johnloony]

In the days when I still used to go back to help count the votes in Student Union elections at my old university, we had one election in which the two candidates got about 400 votes each. The margin on the first three counts was 3, 0, 0. The fourth count was expected to be the final recount, but it changed from 0 to 1. So there were two more counts (5th and 6th) which both confirmed it as 1.

P.S. After about a month in office, the winning candidate resigned and the runner-up candidate was co-opted to fill the position.

[froome]

Is there any limit to the number of recounts that can take place?

At what point is a toss up of a coin taken - is it only when all candidates accept the count as valid?

[gwynthegriff]

In Crewe & Nantwich we had two very close results close together (possibly in consecutive years):- a majority of 1, and a tie.

(Different wards)

[gwynthegriff]

Of course, every Agent dreads the candidate who requests a recount when the result is close.

And they are ahead!

[timrollpickering]

Recounts can be called for about five reasons:

* If the verification total doesn't match the count total.
* A very close result for first place.
* A very close result for second place lest a petition find the winner ineligible.
* A candidate narrowly losing their deposit.
* If George Galloway wants one. It's easier all round to just say yes and get on with it.

[timrollpickering]

Feb 28, 2017 17:12:58 GMT Adrian said:

In 2017 manual counting shouldn't be necessary. We don't mark multiple-choice exam papers manually - the technology is quite basic now and should be provided to every council for vote counting.

Considering the repeated screw-ups with London's counting machines I don't share your confidence.

[J.G.Harston]

Feb 28, 2017 22:34:13 GMT gwynthegriff said:

Of course, every Agent dreads the candidate who requests a recount when the result is close.

And they are ahead!

In 2006 at my re-election I was 1863 to 1783, and grabbed the opportunity to say to my opponent "all done now?" holding out my hand, he replied "yes, all done", shaking my hand. (Wonderful! He's acknowledged I've won, let's get this signed off as quick as possible before his agent wakes up and badgers for further counting). I then said something like "ok, just check off the spoils" (meaning, ok, all done, just agree with the returning officer that the spoils were spoils and let him sign the result), and my agent looked like she was having a heart attack thinking I was asking for a recount , with six spoiled ballot papers.

[iainbhx]

Feb 28, 2017 22:34:13 GMT gwynthegriff said:

Of course, every Agent dreads the candidate who requests a recount when the result is close.

And they are ahead!

I would make Malcolm Tucker look genial and non-threatening in such a circumstance. I was told I could be heard on the other side of the ICC after a nasty bit of practice with Sparkbrook's 2004 count where a result was accepted without a recount.

[peterl]

Feb 28, 2017 23:03:37 GMT timrollpickering said:

Feb 28, 2017 17:12:58 GMT Adrian said:

In 2017 manual counting shouldn't be necessary. We don't mark multiple-choice exam papers manually - the technology is quite basic now and should be provided to every council for vote counting.

Considering the repeated screw-ups with London's counting machines I don't share your confidence.

Indeed. Electronic counting is so unreliable, any election counted by machine should be automatically void.

As for recounts, for a local election I would say 20 votes would be about the limit to sensibly ask for one. For Parliament, probably around 100 to 200. If there is a recount that matches the previous count or makes only a trivial difference, that should be it. Incidentally, there is a huge difference is how long it takes for a count to be completed between councils and there are some councils that could do two full recounts in the time another takes for their first count. This means that (in a general election) there are very late declarations when councils that lag on their first count need to do a recount. If they learned a little best practice from more efficient councils, every seat could declare by breakfast even when recounts are needed.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

In 1998 in Millbank ward Westminster the Labour team decided not to ask for a recount in a split ward where one Labour candidate was 11 votes off being elected, for fear that the recount might end up with another Labour candidate losing the 31 vote lead by which he had kept his seat.

[Zardoz]

Feb 28, 2017 22:25:26 GMT johnloony said:

In the days when I still used to go back to help count the votes in Student Union elections at my old university, we had one election in which the two candidates got about 400 votes each. The margin on the first three counts was 3, 0, 0. The fourth count was expected to be the final recount, but it changed from 0 to 1. So there were two more counts (5th and 6th) which both confirmed it as 1.

P.S. After about a month in office, the winning candidate resigned and the runner-up candidate was co-opted to fill the position.

Students Union elections are odd things. When I was at Manchester University in the late 1970s, many of the Students Union Council positions were 'constituency' seats. You had to be a student in the relevant faculty to vote - but not to stand. The Town & Country Planning Faculty position was a standing joke since, as often as not, no-one stood for it and, on the occasions that they did, were unopposed. One year, a Tory student in the faculty stood - but was opposed by another candidate (an Anarchist) from another faculty. The Tory won - the result was one-nil! There was no recount! If I recall correctly, the two candidates were both called Dave Evans.

Also, the first time I stood in an election - for NUS delegation by STV - I got in by 0.33 votes. However, one of the winning candidates was disqualified the following day and, after a recount, I lost by 0.24 votes! I still got to go to NUS Conference, though, as I was top-placed Observer.

[J.G.Harston]

Mar 1, 2017 1:36:25 GMT Zardoz said:

Students Union elections are odd things. ...

The first campaign I was involved in was getting RON elected student president when the only other candidate was a convicted murderer in the prison down the road.