Greetings,
You may be interested to learn of the problem the Liberal Party (  http://www.liberal.org.uk ) candidates for the Heath Town ward, Wolverhampton had in the recent local elections.
For years Colin Hallmark has been coming second in elections in the Heath Town ward. We issued a pre-election leaflet as well as the election leaflet and worked hard in our campaign so that Colin had the time for canvassing, only for the Hallmark family to find on the election day, that although the ballot papers had the correct description of "Liberal Party Candidate" under each of the three candidates names, the emblem of the Liberal Democrats was along-side each name with the words "Liberal Democrats", underneath. None of the Liberals were allowed in the inner-area where votes were being counted, they were told that you have to trust people sometimes, they had to argue to inspect the spoilt ballots, which had been sealed in an envelope, and they had to argue for a recount. Colin was 69 votes from winning a seat with our other candidates further behind.
As a result of Colin's complaints the returning officer, Co-ordinating Director of Law and Resources at Wolverhampton Council, Richard Roberts, sent him a letter saying that the placing of the wrong emblem was clearly an error in his office and apologizing unreservedly for any distress, inconvenience, or confusion the mistake on the ballot papers may have caused. Then: "The preparation process for ballot papers goes through a number of different checks and is scrutinized by a number of different people. I have spoken to those involved and I am satisfied that this was a genuine mistake. This was a difficult election to organize administratively and everyone involved in the process was under considerable pressure, but this in no way exuses the mistake." Then, in the next paragraph: "I advized you at the count that, notwithstanding the mistaken logo, I believed the ballot papers were valid and the poll properly conducted. As a consequence I was under a duty to declare the result at Heath Town."
As a scrutineer at the count for the Coseley East ward in these local elections and Liberal candidate for the same ward for the previous two elections, I know that what happened in Wolverhampton is in contrast with the superior electoral practice of Dudley M. B. C.

Now, you may be thinking, what does a little local difficulty like this matter in the grand scheme of things? Well, the Socialist Alliance (  http://www.socialistalliance.net/ ) has already had a similar though less serious problem.
The returning officer for an election in the Wigan area decided to put an earlier S. A. emblem, than that requested by them, on the ballot paper because he prefered it. The problem was that not only was it against the wishes of the Socialist Alliance but the emblem on the ballot paper was no longer legally registered for such use and that the one requested by the S. A. was registered to replace it long before that election.
Our problem is more serious because we are a separate party from the Liberal Democrats with our own more radical policies and consider our party to be the true voice of Liberalism. Also that if any of our Heath Town candidates had won the losing Labour candidate(s) would probably have petitioned the relevent court for another election.
Your problem is that as candidate or voter you could be next if council officers aren't sufficiently deterred from making or allowing such mistakes. They are unfair because candidates should always be able to control their identity on the ballot paper and unfair to us all, as voters, because we should be aware of the true alleigencies of candidates. Also, as candidate or voter you should be very worried if no-one has access to scrutinize your count. Remember the questionable electoral process and biased court that allowed George W. Bush to be U. S. president. There is also the problem of the alleged stolen postal votes (  http://www.stolenvotes.org.uk/ ) in certain areas of the U. K.

To have the chance of being granted another election or even the chance of the returning officer being declared to be in breach of official duty we would have to petition the court. This includes lodging £2000 with the court and the possibility that even if we won we would risk paying court costs if the returning officer/ Wolverhampton Council refused to do so. Not to mention possible solicitors fees. We have until 21 days after declaration of the result on Friday the 11th of June to do this.
Maybe those returning officers who are well paid to make sure elections are correctly conducted, should personally contribute to the costs of court procedings related to their mistakes.
Proving in court that 69 people decided not to vote for Colin, because of the mistake, would be unlikely as such people may be difficult to find. It is, however, a matter of proveable fact that the returning officer comitted a breach of official duty and if we could afford the process we would probably petition for this declaration and win!
This is yet another example of how, so many times, those of us less weathy, don't have access to justice. It is also an example of how the law is biased in favour of returning officers.
A few years ago, candidates use of descriptions like "Literal Democrat" and "Old Labour" resulted in parliament passing the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 ( 2000 http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/20000041.htm ), to stop candidates using confusing descripitions but councils can still do what they like, particularly to less wealthy political parties like ours.

So what to do about all this?
Heads of electoral offices should be able to employ enough properly qualified staff at any time during the election process, who should be paid properly for the job they do.
Candidates should be presented with a proof of the ballot paper before it goes to press.
The wrong descriptions, or emblems on ballot papers should result in the relevent poll being automatically declared void and re-staged.
There should be a consistant high standard of vote counting and access to scutinize it.
Also, on the subject of the national problem with postal votes, that the regulations should be tightened up and there should be no more all-postal ballots,

Goodbye.