Mr. Damien Geoghegan:

We have also put together a critique of the savings claimed in the establishment of a commission. The proponents of a single electoral commission argue that by centralising some or all of the functions in a central organisation there would be cost and efficiency savings. It is also argued that a body with a remit focused on electoral administration would do the job more effectively than county councils or county registrars, for whom electoral administration is only a part of their overall responsibilities. To assess the usefulness of such claims, the following should be taken into account.

On the savings claimed, we make the following points. The local authorities would continue in existence performing all other functions; therefore, we would see the savings on the franchise side as minimal. Similarly, county registrars, for court purposes, would continue in existence; therefore, savings in terms of their time involved in election administration would also be small.

On the franchise unit of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, it is certain that even if a one-stop electoral commission were to be set up, the Department would still need an office dealing with broad policy and the drafting of electoral legislation. A transfer of functions to a new electoral commission could, in time, lead to a duplication of work.

On the Standards in Public Office Commission and the administration of election spending, it is true that the commission and the local authorities operate parallel systems for different cohorts of elected members. Some savings may be possible in developing a common template for such returns. However, on integrating the SIPO with an electoral commission, there is an argument that the standards in public office body should stand alone, given its very specific role in maintaining propriety and standards.

The approach to the Referendum Commission is essentially ad hoc, with a commission being called into office as a referendum is called. There have been complaints that the short period in office of a commission does not allow it to sufficiently convey information in advance of a referendum. This is one area where integration with a more continuous body could help in conveying information to the public and enhancing voter turnout. That said, the experience of the May 2015 same sex marriage referendum showed that the existing system operated by the county councils was able to cope with a surge of new registrations within a matter of weeks before the referendum.

Taking all of the above into account, there is a question as to whether a single body, as proposed, would, in fact, deliver appreciable savings, which would be at the cost of losing local knowledge and involvement.