How’s election law shaping up for this general election?

There’s an extensive piece in today’s edition of The Scotsman, which includes some observations from myself:

Constraints on election practices tick all the boxes for the fairest of fights…

In 2005, total Labour spending was £17.94m, including £1.64m in Scotland; Conservatives spent £17.85m including £1.32m in Scotland; Liberal Democrats laid out £4.32m including £435,000 in Scotland; and the SNP spent £193,000 in Scotland.

Profligate though these figures may appear at a time when it can be assumed that the majority of candidates standing will be arguing the looming need to spend less, they are extremely modest in comparison with other major democracies…

In recent years, the system of postal votes has been tightened up considerably. They now need a signature and date of birth on the application and on the vote.

Mr Pack says it is harder now to forge votes on a large-enough scale to make a difference to the final result. “Bizarrely, I have been present at many postal vote openings and a number each time were not counted because the applicant put in today’s date where they were meant to enter their date of birth,” he says.

“There is an issue that may need to be addressed because you are not told if your vote is not counted for a reason like that so the error can’t be corrected.”

You can read the full post here.