Thank you.
The spoilt votes are confirmed in batches. There will probably be someone there from the party at each session. That might be me.
The spoilt votes are held up one by one. It is possible to see where they are marked, but not how they are marked, so you can see if they have been written across, but not what the writing is. Each is held up for a second, and everyone nods to agree it is spoilt, and we move on to the next one.
It is possible to ask for a closer look. This happens if there is room for disagreement about whether a vote is actually irredeemably spoilt. I have a huge list of records of previous agreements in different circumstances, for example, does the cross go into two boxes? Is there more than one mark on the paper but it is possible to decide which one is intended?
Papers which are marked ambiguously or unintentionally unclearly will probably be looked at closely and discussed. I have personally in the past argued that a particular paper was marked with one candidate being chosen, even though the paper had then been smudged, and the ink had gone into more than one box.
The papers that are looked at and discussed are ones like this, where it seems the voter did have an particular intention, but they have not expressed it correctly. There is no looking at, recording or discussion of papers deliberately spoilt, written on, drawn on, etc. They will be held up, and agreed to be spoilt, but no one will be close enough to see the details, and no one will ask to see the details. There is no time for that.