Welcome to a banana republic?

IT'S been the cornerstone of British democracy for more than 100 years.

The secret ballot has remained the envy of the world and the integrity of election results hardly ever questioned.

Yet the worrying spectre of Southampton's general election result being tainted by malpractice has been raised by one of the city's leading academics - thanks to the enormous rise in postal votes that have been registered in the city.

With even one of the key figures running Southampton's election this year acknowledging that postal voting has increased the opportunity for fraud to take place, how can citizens trust the results on May 5?

Applications to vote by post in Southampton have soared from just 4,800 in the last election to a staggering 26,000 applications this time. In Southampton about one sixth of the city's 151,000 electors are now able to vote by post.

Nationally that figures has soared by 500 per cent in marginal seats in the election. Also, it is reported today that for the first time the government has asked international observers to monitor the last week of the election campaign. Their remit would include postal voting.

James Connelly, professor of political thought at Southampton Institute, said that there were fears the poll in Southampton, and indeed nationwide, could be tainted.

He said: "In Southampton, both MPs had majorities of over 10,000. There is a potential for fraud to make a difference here.

"If fraud takes place, the election could be decided. You can also still register to vote until April 29.

"It is potentially very serious. I think people in three weeks' time are going to be very worried about it. The postal vote process needs to be strengthened."

Already in Hampshire, the police have appointed a specialist officer aimed at preventing fraud in the general election along with every police force in the country.

The officer will liaise with command units across the county including Southampton's if there is any suspicion of vote rigging.

If the allegations prove serious, the allegation will be dealt with by Hampshire's fraud squad in conjunction with returning officers from the county's constituencies.

The move follows a scandal in Birmingham where six councillors were found guilty of electoral fraud during last year's polls.

In the case, Judge Richard Mawrey QC said the postal vote system was "hopelessly insecure'' and there had been enough evidence of fraud to "disgrace a banana republic''.

He added: "Postal ballots are sent out by ordinary mail in clearly identifiable envelopes. Short of writing 'steal me' on the envelopes, it is hard to see what more could be done to ensure their coming into the wrong hands."

Now police chiefs want each of the force's basic command units to have an officer as a point of contact who will investigate in the event of fraud allegations.

Senior electoral officers in the city admit the system could be open to abuse.

However, they stress there has never been any evidence of electoral fraud in the city.

They are also at pains to point out that non-postal voting could also be undertaken fraudulently - if people were sufficiently determined.

In Southampton the city's chief returning officer Mark Heath has already had a meeting with agents from political parties contesting the election to discuss the issue and further meetings are planned between the police and the City Council.

Mr Heath acknowledged that the problem of electoral fraud was "an issue" but stressed that no problems had ever occurred in Southampton as that witnessed in Birmingham.

He said: "We have never had any problems of electoral fraud in Southampton so I don't expect there to be any problems such as what occurred in Birmingham.

"I am calling on the political parties to continue to maintain the highest standards. We are doing all we can and I am doing all I can to maintain the integrity of the poll and I would want voters to be reassured that that is going to happen."

Southampton's deputy returning officer Malcolm Dumper, who is also executive director of the Association of Electoral Administrators, explained that the number of people registering to vote by post in Southampton since 2001 had soared due to a drive, supported by the city's political parties, to register to vote by post at the last local elections in 2002.

During the poll three years ago, postal votes had risen by about 3,000 to approximately 11,000. Registrations had further increased over the past three years because government legislation had allowed postal votes to anyone who applied.

He said: "Political parties have been instrumental and postal voting is now available on demand. A question as to whether you want to register to vote by post is now a statutory part of the registration form."

Mr Dumper told the Daily Echo that the postal voting registration system would not be completely free from the possibility of abuse until how voters register to take part in the poll was sorted out nationally.

He said: "There is no data to validate the application to vote by post against. There is no national insurance number and no date of birth."

In Southampton, the city has introduced a form a "quality control", which requires people who have registered to vote by post to acknowledge they have received their application form.

It means a mechanism is in place to ensure that if someone registers to vote by post using another electors name, the genuine elector can be alerted to what is going on - and can in turn alert city bosses.

Mr Dumper said: "We have had this safeguard in place quite deliberately."

Another safeguard, believed to be unique to the city, is that voters who are registered to vote by post are contacted every year by the city to see if the have changed address.

Mr Heath said: "The electoral system has been, for the last 100 years, based on trust - there is a significant element of trust. It is regrettable that that trust has been broken in Birmingham."

Mr Dumper added: "The decision to allow postal voting on demand has opened up the opportunity for fraud. One of the benefits of the old postal system was that somebody independent had to say you were entitled to a postal vote."

But Mr Heath said that, in Birmingham, individuals committing the crime had been caught.

He added: "It was compromised by individuals who were caught. The election will be re-run. In a sense, the system worked."

However, Prof Connolly said the system needed an overhaul.

"What has happened is that sometimes with postal votes four or five have been going to a family and the head of the family has filled them in," he said.

"I have been very worried about postal voting for a long time. It seems to be relatively easy to get hold of a postal vote.

"I am glad everyone is wising up to it now."

Southampton City Council has provided a hotline number for anyone concerned about the ballot - 023 8083 2245.

WHAT ARE THE FLAWS WITH POSTAL VOTING?

1) Anyone can download an application form from the internet. Applications do not require personal details such as date of birth or national insurance number. It means it is easy to apply in the name of someone else.

2) Many councils do not have the resources to check the identity of applicants. In addition, because the voting packs do not have to be sent to the applicant's home address, they can easily be directed into the hands of fraudsters.

3) Although the identity forms have to be signed, councils do not have the databases to verify the signatures are genuine. There is no law requiring officials to check postal ballots for efficiency.

4) It is not illegal for political canvassers to "help" voters to fill in the forms or witness them, marking their ballot paper. This leaves them open to coercion or intimidation.

POSTAL VOTES APPLIED FOR ACROSS HAMPSHIRE SO FAR:

New Forest:

Number of electors (New Forest East and New Forest West) 138,000

Postal votes in 2005 election, 14,000

Postal votes in 2001 election, 7,500.

EASTLEIGH:

Number of electors: 75,739

Postal votes in 2005 election 9,300

Postal votes in 2001 election 3,303.

GOSPORT:

Number of electors, 70,289

Postal votes in 2005 election, 5,800

Postal Votes in 2001 election, 3,081.

WINCHESTER:

Number of electors, 85,000

Postal votes in 2005 election 11,000

Postal Votes in 2001 election, 2,500.

TEST VALLEY:

Number of electors (incorporating Romsey and North West Hants Constituency) 151,940.

Postal votes in 2005 election, 10,000

Postal votes in 2001 election, 6,603.