 mae'n gweithio yn ffy忘u gyda ni i ddengyrch yn yoliaeth ar y cyflwyno'r bulw. Erhyw'r ffermau yn geisio'r bwysig ar gael so gilydd eu cyflwyno. Felly mae'r ffermau hyn yn eistedd gyda'r cyffredin yn llwyddau hwnnw gyrfa gennymol yn yr eich hunain. Mae gynhyrchu bywyd yng nghymru othen yn deall yr oeddech chi'n gwneud, ac mae'n gael i'r syniadau o'r anodd lleidio'r cyfnoddau. Mae'r anodd lleidio'r cyfnoddau yn cael y 5 cwmniadau ei fod yn cyfnoddau. Fy enw, mae'r anodd teimlo'r cyfnoddau. Mae'r anodd llwyddon yn cael ei gwybodaeth o'r cyfnoddau y Llywodraeth Llywodraeth, ond y Llywodraeth Llywodraeth wedi ei chweilio'r anodd llwyddon yn gwybod of whether it is an election year or not. There will be ongoing investments such as voter registration infrastructure, the buildings which EMB staff work in, or sustained utility costs. Secondly, there are then the event-related investments. Some costs will be related to a particular electoral contest, a referendum or an election. On the day of the election, there will obviously be an additional cost in terms of the staff to man the polling stations or the hiring of the premises. Next, there are the security investments. Resources will be needed to ensure the security or the integrity of the election. These have traditionally been thought to fall in or around election day, where extra police may be required to secure polling stations. In other words, it is an event-related investment. However, threats may emerge at other points in the cycle as well. For example, cyber threats such as online attacks at voter registration records might occur at any particular moment in time. So some security costs will be sustained costs as well. There are also campaign investments. Some democracies provide candidates or parties with free postage or airtime or resources. These will need budgeting for. Again, they are event-related costs. And lastly, there are project investments. Most costs are tied to a point in the electoral cycle. However, a reform might be introduced that will take several electoral cycles to implement. For example, a major change to introduce electronic voting could take many, many years. Projects may also have anticipated costs which could continue into the longer term. The introduction of individual election registration in Britain is one example. This was a one-off reform that was introduced in 2014, made voter registration much more expensive to undertake. So we've already seen how many different types of costs there are involved in elections. And for this reason, elections are often described as one of the most complex logistical events to ever take place during peacetime. And yet the credibility of the political system depends on their safe delivery. They involve enormous volumes of staff, complex technology and sophisticated security. It's therefore no surprise this requires considerable resource investment. And from research that we've done, we've found that budgets can therefore be as much as US$30 per person at an electoral contest. We often hear stories in the press of electoral management bodies being under severe financial pressure with declining budgets. We actually undertook some research on this, surveying electoral management bodies around the world and found a very mixed experience. As the figure shows, in general, budgets are often usually increasing more than they are declining. But it's certainly the case that some electoral management bodies have seen cuts and where there have been cuts, they've also often been very significant. We know that overall levels of performance can be affected by budget cuts. My research has shown that where budgets were declining, the performance of electoral management bodies, as measured by independent expert surveys, is lower. There's also some evidence that budget cuts leads to cuts in the services provided to voters. In the UK, for example, my research shows that voter outreach activities were the casualties of austerity measures. There can also be effects on staff over time, loss of holidays and increased staff levels can all occur. This isn't sustainable in the longer term and it is likely to lead to some staff leaving. They take valuable knowledge and experience with them that is very difficult to replace. There are a number of steps that could make for better run elections. Not all of this is about getting more money, but this obviously will help. Advocacy is a very important starting point. Senior electoral officials will need to lobby budget holders to explain why investment in elections is important, but also why the timing is so important as well. The late disbursements of funds, for example, can lead to delays in purchases. You can also make purchases much more expensive. It's worth also looking at procurement procedures and simplifying them to give it flexibility where possible to electoral officials. Contingency planning for unexpected costs is absolutely central. Expanding the range of suppliers can help lower the overall costs for an election and also expanding the pool of short-term employees in case there is, for example, staff illnesses, but also industrial action close to an electoral event. So overall I think there are five main principles to think about when investment in elections is made. Firstly, as we have already covered sufficiently, is absolutely central. In short, there needs to be enough money to cover the strategic objectives. Secondly, transparency. Open, transparent accounting for the income and the expenditure is important because it increases confidence among stakeholders that money is being spent appropriately. It enables accountability and an EMB can be criticised for the misuse of funds. It also allows lesson drawing. EMBs with similar demographic characteristics can compare budgets to see whether they have sufficient funds. This can then allow them to lobby for more or to look for ways in which they need to spend their money more efficiently. Thirdly, the sustainability of funding. Elections are an ongoing process as the electoral cycle illustrates. Short-term and lumpy investment may be required to overcome immediate pressures or cash restraint. But it's important that funding is available over the longer term. If donors or overseas governments invest in the electoral process in the short term to get elections up and running, then we need to think what happens next. What about the longer term? Fourthly, the legitimacy of funding is important too. Having multiple sources of funding is sometimes necessary to ensure suficiency and sustainability. Donors such as governments or NGOs may decide to provide direct assistance to the election. Money may even come from private sector sources. Some sources of income could be seen as illegitimate, however, in the eyes of the public and other stakeholders, which can undermine the electoral process. Fifth, contingency. Unexpected things happen. Inflation can suddenly change costs, perhaps in response to a global shock such as rises in oil prices or geopolitical stability. Trade unions may mobilise to bring demands for higher wages. Equipment can be damaged through floods. Technology may need to be updated. Additional polling stations may be needed due to population rises or the building of new housing developments in particular areas. Risk management plans are therefore essential to ensure that the shock rises to costs can be covered.