Political Legitimacy, Partisanship and Polarization: Debates Over Electoral Integrity and Quality in Britain

As elsewhere, questions over electoral integrity and election quality have become increasingly important in Britain. Echoing debates in the US, conflict over electoral integrity and electoral administration has polarised around concerns over electoral fraud at one end of the spectrum, and electoral registration at the other, with both sides of the argument making recommendations for reform. This paper examines how these debates have developed over time through a unique dataset of parliamentary debates and questions over the last two decades. It will show that concerns about electoral quality and integrity have grown in the previous two decades. It tracks the development of partisanship and polarisation on these issues, and demonstrate how narratives about electoral fraud have been broadened from a narrow definition, to include virtually any election-related offence. In combination with this increasing polarisation, attacks on the main UK electoral regulator, the Electoral Commission, have increased in light of it being increasingly active in sanctioning breaches of electoral regulation. Combined, this polarisation and politicisation of the electoral process is serving to undermine fundamental tenets of British electoral quality. The first section outlines a broad continuum for understanding debates on electoral integrity, while the second section develops a framework for explaining how the politicisation and partisanship around electoral quality has developed. The third section outlines the data utilised before the paper moves on to analyse these data. It will suggest that a process of international policy-learning has taken place, with debates about election quality in other advanced democracies, most notably the USA, informing current debates in the UK. It will also argue that, in part, British politicians are caught in a regulatory web of their own making with little option but to voice discontent when problems arise. The paper concludes with recommendations on how this politicisation and polarisation might be minimised.