With record candidate numbers pushing last week's local elections to new levels of complexity, LocalGov editor William Eichler speaks to Peter Stanyon, the chief executive of the Association of Electoral Administrators, about the human cost of delivering democracy – and whether the profession can sustain the pressure.

Last week's local elections were historic for more reasons than the political headlines. Record numbers of candidates – many of them from newer parties with little experience of the electoral process – created an administrative burden that stretched electoral services teams, their supply chains and their wellbeing to the limit. Peter Stanyon, chief executive of the Association of Electoral Administrators, spoke to LocalGov about what it was really like on the ground.

Longer papers, fuller ballot boxes

The surge in candidates – over 25,000 stood at last week's elections – did not simply mean more paperwork at the nominations stage. The knock-on effects rippled through the entire delivery chain in ways that many outside the profession might not have anticipated.

‘One of the printers said they printed 750 miles more ballot paper than they did at the equivalent elections four years ago,’ says Stanyon. ‘It puts it in perspective.’

Those longer ballot papers created a cascade of practical challenges. How many times does a voter need to fold a paper to fit it through the slot of a ballot box? How many papers fit in a box before it's full? How long does it take to unfold irregularly folded papers at the count?

‘If they're all folded as little ducks and frogs because people have been putting them in a strange way, it takes a lot longer to get that count going,’ says Stanyon. ‘You've got to get them flat and ready to be looked at.’ Add to that the complexity of multi-vacancy counts in areas with new ward boundaries, and the length of many counts was simply a function of scale.

For printers, Royal Mail and the wider supply chain, the pressures were as significant as those faced by the administrators themselves.

Explaining the rules – equally, to everyone

The influx of candidates from newer and smaller parties also placed a particular burden on returning officers and their teams in a less obvious way: education.

‘It's making sure that those who are not in the machines that do elections regularly understand the process and understand the rules,’ says Stanyon. ‘Some of the confusion and tension in some areas was because they just didn't understand the rules. That's the way democracy works.’

Crucially, he is clear that this obligation falls equally on teams regardless of the political persuasion of the candidate in front of them. ‘Accessibility to the process is equal regardless of political persuasion – far right, far left, in the middle, whatever colour. Sometimes I think that gets forgotten.’

'We survived the election'

The most telling phrase of the interview comes when Stanyon reflects on the culture shift he has observed among electoral services teams over recent years.

‘It used to be the case of “we delivered a successful election,”’ he says. ‘I think it's fair to say now “we survived the election” is probably more the case in a lot of areas.’

That shift is not simply a reflection of administrative complexity. It is, he argues, a product of growing external pressure and reduced public trust in institutions – a climate in which returning officers, who are personally and legally liable for the delivery of elections, are increasingly subject to scrutiny and challenge despite having no ability to respond publicly.

‘Public officials can't say a word because they are there to deliver the process itself,’ says Stanyon. ‘We're aware of some instances where people have put themselves physically and mentally in terrible positions and are suffering now as a result of coming out of these polls.’

Recruiting and retaining staff is an ongoing struggle. The complexity introduced by the Elections Act 2022 – voter ID being the most prominent change – has made polling station roles significantly harder than they were even five years ago. Many teams rely heavily on retired local government staff who understand the process; replacing that cohort as they step back is a growing challenge.

What comes next

Stanyon is watching the Representation of the People Bill closely. While much of it is broadly welcomed – automated voter registration and votes at 16 are both supported by the AEA in principle – he has specific concerns about the proposal to allow bank cards as a valid form of voter ID.

‘If you've got a bank card with just your initials on it, that will hold the same level of ID as me arriving with a passport,’ he says. ‘That's a complete mismatch.’

He also flags the proposal to require candidates to produce ID at the point of submitting nominations as a significant practical challenge at the scale seen last week, raising unresolved questions about data storage, access and process for tens of thousands of candidates.

For now, though, the immediate task is recovery. Electoral services teams across the country will be picking up the pieces – and, in many cases, simply catching their breath.