Professor Michael Marsh:

There is good work done on reasons for turnout. The views are not entirely consistent on postal voting. Many of the conclusions on such voting say it makes it easier to vote for those who would vote anyway. Clearly, if one goes on holiday and otherwise could not vote, it would help but those who do not tune into politics and would not think about voting still would not vote even with a postal vote. There are other consequences of postal voting.

In Sweden, where postal voting is very easy, at least two thirds vote long before the election is actually held which means running around campaigning is a waste of time as most of the people have already voted.

I was asked about judges. I sat here before and suggested a head of a tabloid newspaper should run the electoral commission rather than a judge because they might be rather better at communicating with the people than the average judge, although there have been some very good ones. I do not know that I still necessarily subscribe to that view but, equally, I do not know why a judge is thought suitable. Having met quite a few of them, I do not think they are particularly neutral. In comparable countries, such as the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, what we used to call the "English-speaking world", they seem to have a high opinion of judges and a low opinion of the rest of us, but that is the way it is.