SCOTLAND’S electoral watchdog is to tackle the issue of abuse of candidates as "a matter of urgency” after reports of threats and intimidation at this year’s council elections.
Verbal and online abuse were the most common sources, with more than four out five reports – 84% - relating to the behaviour of members of the public.
A further one in 10 of those who reported issues had received threats or abuse from other candidates.
Female candidates were far more likely to experience abuse than men – with 48% saying it was not a problem, compared to 64% of male candidates.
One said: “In person intimidation/threats/abuse only happened when I was campaigning alone.
“I've decided not to do that in future, however it's frustrating when seeing other (male!) candidates campaigning solo seemingly without such concerns of intimidation.”
READ MORE: Foreign nationals to be allowed to stand in local elections
Overall 44% of those standing for a council seat said they had experienced some kind of problem with abuse – with 10% rating it as “serious”.
And one in ten said that their experience would discourage them from standing as a candidate in the future.
The 2022 elections were the first council elections where candidates could choose whether or not to have their home address displayed on the ballot paper, in response to concerns about personal safety.
The vast majority of candidates opted not to display their home address on the ballot papers.
The Electoral Commission report stated: “Some candidates reported experiences of intimidation and abuse at these elections, which is not acceptable.
“We will work with the UK’s governments, Police Scotland and the wider electoral community to make sure we understand what is driving candidate abuse and intimidation, and to ensure this issue is addressed as a matter of urgency.”
READ MORE: Single transferable vote: spoilt ballot papers more likely, reports warns
The report also noted turnout at the council elections in May was 44.8%, slightly down from the figure of 46.9% in 2017.
People who did not vote were most likely to say it was because they did not have time – with around a fifth giving this reason.
Just over one in ten – 12% - said it was because they were not interested in politics, while 11% had medical or health reasons.
The number of spoilt ballot papers has fallen since the last council election – from 1.95% in 2017 to 1.85% this year. But the report noted they have increased in some wards and “further targeted action” is needed to address this issue.
The Glasgow Canal ward had the highest number of rejected votes, at 5.64% compared to 5.36% in 2017.
READ MORE: Tory who called Nicola Sturgeon a 'drooling hag' gets top paid job at Fife Council
“The Electoral Commission has previously carried out research which indicated that the wards with the highest levels of rejection were more likely to have higher levels of deprivation and unemployment,” the report said.
“However, we also found that these wards were more likely to have more than one candidate standing from a particular party, thereby increasing the risk of voters placing ‘Xs’ against their preferred party’s candidates on the ballot paper.
“We will repeat our ward level analysis when the new Scottish census data is available in 2023.”
Sue Bruce, Electoral Commissioner for Scotland said: “Voter confidence in elections remains high, thanks to the dedicated work of election teams across Scotland.
“However, further action is needed to ensure everyone understands how to complete their ballot paper so their vote can count.
“We will be taking forward urgent targeted work with the electoral community to trial new approaches to tackling voter information at council elections.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel