European Parliamentary and Local Elections (Pilots) Bill

---

[back to previous text]

Mr. Hawkins: As the Minister said earlier, I agree with the Government's view on not including Gibraltar. However, he must be careful in saying that the Electoral Commission has carried out studies over numerous years. The Electoral Commission was only brought into existence by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. It has not existed for numerous years. He should be careful not to over-egg his pudding.

Mr. Leslie: I shall use phrase ''several years'' rather than ''numerous years'', although I think that three counts as numerous.

In respect of the amendments about the inclusion of London, the complexity relates to the different electoral systems that are likely to be used. The mayoral election, of course, uses the supplementary voting system. The London Assembly uses an additional member system and the European Parliament uses the closed list system. Those complexities add something that could be too burdensome for the regional returning officer at this early stage if they also have to cope with all-postal balloting. We have adopted our position for that reason alone.

Amendment No. 1 would exclude Scotland from being a pilot. My hon. Friends, and in particular my hon. Friends the Members for Glasgow, Anniesland and for Glasgow, Cathcart, have raised strong arguments about how irrational and illogical the amendment is. The idea that Scotland would be less capable of running a pilot than any other region is spurious, and the evidence is not particularly strong. That is not to say that Scotland will or will not be chosen, which is a matter for the Electoral Commission to advise upon; I will listen carefully to its advice.

Mr. Hawkins: I want to take the opportunity, now that the Minister has turned his attention to Scotland, to place it on the record that the last Member whom I would want to traduce in any way is the hon. Member for Glasgow, Pollok, who is probably my closest cross-party friend and is my fellow winger in the parliamentary rugby team. Having opened on Second Reading by saying that he would support the Government, however, he made it clear in his speech that he violently and strongly opposes the e-voting pilots. He told me that he did not believe that he would be allowed to sit on this Committee for that reason, which has been the case. I do not want to mislead anyone. I partially accept the rebuke from the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart, but he knows the views of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Pollok on e-„voting as well as I do. We both heard them in the Chamber.

3.45 pm

Mr. Leslie: We could spend all day trying to interpret the views of my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Pollok. That would be exceptionally interesting, but I will not be tempted to do so. It is slightly odd for the Conservative party officially to suggest that there are larger personation and broad risks in Scotland than anywhere else because of its student population. That is an odd approach, which we will pocket for the time being.

Amendment No. 20 would exclude two regions with common boundaries. There is no logical or fair reason for that. I heard the comments by the hon. Member for Surrey Heath about people on different sides of the street using different voting mechanisms, but even if people on one side of a street were to have an all-postal vote while those on the other could vote conventionally, I do not believe that those people would be particularly likely to talk about that fact, or that they would be bothered by it. Even if there were such discontent, it would not be an insurmountable problem. It would be discriminatory to exclude two regions with a common boundary. Boundaries between regions should not be a factor in the success or evaluation of piloting. I hope that my hon. Friends will reject the amendment, and that hon. Members will consider withdrawing it.

Mr. Heath: We have had an extensive debate on this group of amendments, so it is probably otiose to say too much at this stage.

I am grateful to hon. Members who have made sensible points about the amendments.

Mr. Wilshire: That is everybody.

Mr. Heath: I did not exclude anyone, did I? I simply said that I am grateful to those hon. Members who made sensible points. I always am.

There is still an argument about whether elections in three regions would be better than a UK-wide election. If we had not had the break over lunch, which made me forget my point, I would have used the argument raised by the hon. Member for North Tayside (Pete Wishart), which I also used on Second Reading, which was that a significant problem with part of the country voting on an all-postal basis while other parts vote normally on polling day, is that some people would be excluded from the latter stages of what is a national campaign. Paradoxically, that is an argument for Scotland to be used as a pilot area. Scotland has separate media and political systems, so if it were a pilot area, it would have a campaign that was appropriate to the form of voting, which would not spill over the border. However, I will leave that thought. I am not convinced that we are going down the right road.

I still have not heard a sensible reason why Gibraltar cannot do a postal vote when the rest of the country can. I had hoped to get such a reason from the Minister. He simply said that the Electoral Commission has not done any studies there, but Gibraltar is much like many parts of the UK. The population there are not particularly likely to be unable to cope with a postal voting system. I have great respect for the electorate in Gibraltar. We still do not know—

Mr. Wilshire: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Heath: We have had a long debate. Unless the hon. Gentleman has a really pressing point with which to intervene, we should conclude our debate.

When speaking in support of his amendments, the hon. Member for Surrey Heath made some arguments about Scotland that were the most preposterous that I have ever heard in a Committee. The Conservative party has certainly had some difficulties over recent days, and I believe that the hon. Gentleman may be having similar difficulties of his own with a vote of confidence. On one of the amendments, he managed to mislay 33.33 per cent. of the Conservative members present in the Committee, and on another proposition, he lost 66.66 per cent. of his colleagues, who held a different view from his and chose to use their independent judgment. He may therefore need to consult a little more; otherwise, he might find himself on a slippery slope.

I am especially grateful for the very cogent points made by the hon. Member for Rochford and Southend, East. He obviously understood some of our arguments, and expressed his views extremely well, as always.

I have considered what the Minister said, and I accept that we are not going to have a meeting of minds on amendment No. 45. I do not intend to press it to a vote, and will seek leave of the Committee to withdraw it. However, in view of the way in which the Minister intends to approach the laying of the orders, and given the views of the Electoral Commission, it is appropriate to ask for a Division on amendment No. 48. I hope that right hon. and hon. Members will support it.

I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed: No. 48, in

clause 1, page 2, line 3, at end add—

'(c)‚any region which does not meet the criteria identified by the Electoral Commission for inclusion as a pilot region'.—[Mr. Heath.]

Question put, That the amendment be made:—

The Committee divided -.: Ayes 4, Noes 10.

Division No. 5]

AYES Brooke, Annette Heath, Mr. David Taylor, Sir Teddy Wishart, Pete

NOES Campbell, Mr. Alan Davies, Geraint Drew, Mr. David Harris, Mr. Tom Lazarowicz, Mr. Mark Leslie, Mr. Christopher Prentice, Bridget Robertson, John Taylor, Ms Dari Turner, Mr. Neil

Question accordingly negatived.

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2

Pilot order

Mr. Hawkins: I beg to move amendment No. 2, in

clause 2, page 2, leave out lines 12 and 13.

The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendment:

No. 50, in

clause 2, page 2, line 14, at end insert—

'(3B) If the pilot order makes provision for voting to take place on more than one day under subsection (3)(a), the Secretary of State must also make an order requiring a register to be available to candidates in the election and their agents at the end of each day showing those electors who have at that time voted in the election.'.

Mr. Hawkins: I shall be brief, which I am sure you will appreciate, Mr. Cook, as will the Minister and members of the Committee, as we have already had an extensive debate on other matters.

Amendment No. 2 seeks to delete subsection (3)(a), which says:

''on more than one day (whether or not each of the days is a day appointed as a day of the poll)''.

I hope that the Minister will give us a detailed explanation of the paragraph, as there is a danger that it could be interpreted to mean that we will have not only postal ballots but multiple-day voting. I do not know whether the paragraph is intended to lead to e-voting, which we are strongly against, as the Minister will know, but it could be clearer. This could be considered to be one of my Plain English Campaign amendments. Rather than trying to re-draft the paragraph, I have tabled a probing amendment, similar to the one that I tabled to clause 1, to see whether the Minister can explain the paragraph satisfactorily. If he cannot, will he undertake to seek advice from his officials to see whether there is a clearer way of expressing what he means to do?

We do not want multiple-day voting, as I said in an earlier debate. Our main concern is the one that was forcefully expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Upminster on Second Reading. If there is a postal pilot in any region, it is crucial that it should still be possible for any person who wishes to do so, despite its being a postal pilot area, to bring a ballot paper in person on what is regarded by the media and everyone involved in the conduct of the election as the main voting day for the election—European or any other. If the Minister can reassure me, and through me my hon. Friend and others, that that will happen in every area and that he will so instruct the Electoral Commission, we shall be a great deal happier. This is an appropriate moment for him to give that indication if he is prepared to do so.

I should like to see words to that effect in the Bill, because a number of my hon. Friends feel strongly that there should be a guarantee that on what is regarded by the media and everyone else as the day of the election, even if it is an all-postal pilot, people should still be able to vote. My hon. Friend the Member for Reigate, who cannot be with us today, has expressed a strong view, as has my hon. Friend the Member for Woking, who, like me, has a Home Office brief on the shadow Front Bench, but who is not a member of the Committee.

We gathered, particularly from the discussions on Second Reading between the hon. Member for Chorley and my hon. Friend the Member for Upminster, that in Chorley, even though its MP on the Labour Back Benches was very keen on postal pilots, it was still possible for people to cast their votes in person on polling day, whereas in the London borough of Havering, of which the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Upminster forms about one third, that was not possible. Obviously the Electoral Commission had decided different things about different small-scale pilots. It is the clear view on the Conservative Benches that there should always be that opportunity, so I am probing that by means of amendment No. 2.

I shall refer briefly to Liberal Democrat amendment No. 50. As the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome has probably already divined from what I said this morning and one of the things that I said this afternoon, we are very keen indeed on a rolling marked register. We agree with his amendment. I had originally intended to add our names to it, but because it was tabled at the end of last week I did not have time. To be honest, when we had the delay because of the Government's defeat, I forgot. I wish I had added our names on Tuesday, but I hope that I can make it clear from the Conservative Benches that we agree absolutely with him and his colleagues. As I mentioned when we debated Scotland, we think that a rolling marked register should be available to the candidates and their agents on a daily basis, and I would have put our names to that had I had the chance. I hope that is helpful. We agree with amendment No. 50 and I can tell the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome that if it goes to a vote, we will support him.

 

---

Prepared 30 October 2003