|
Mr. Djanogly: I am pleased to have prompted such a wide-ranging and amusing debate on ballot papers. Some important points have come out of our discussion. The hon. Member for Somerton and Frome said that the print that is used on ballot papers must be clear. We must look at that further.
A member of the RNIB explained to me that there are levels of blindness. We often think of people who are blind as those who cannot see, but there are a thousand levels in between. The size of print that is used is therefore important. I can see that the ballot paper on the other side of the Committee Room has a great deal of small writing on it.
I accept the right hon. and learned Lady's point that it would be a slightly over-the-top requirement if all registered political parties had to sign up to any changes to the ballot paper's design. I think that she accepts my point that changes should be made only after consultation. We want to have the consent of the mainstream parties. I wish to put on the record my party's concern that we are moving away from primary legislation being the basis for approval.
I thank the Minister for speaking about plans to replace counterfoils. It seems from hon. Members' comments that bar-coding technology is fairly well developed and is there to be used.
I asked the Minister when we would be introducing bar-coded ballot papers throughout the country, but I am not sure that she entirely answered my question. Perhaps she could get back to me and other hon. Members on that point. An answer would be helpful, because the technology should clearly be used nationwide, although we must bear in mind the caveat given by my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton, South (Mr. Binley). He wisely said that all electronic processes have their problems, so we should keep an eye on that. That is perhaps a project for the Electoral Commission. On the basis of what the Minister has said, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 32 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 33 and 34 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 35
Assistance for certain postal voters
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. McGovern: May I seek clarification from the Minister on part of clause 35? I apologise for being hoarse, but I have the cold. Proposed new rule 24(1)(c)
Column Number: 116
in schedule 1 to the Representation of the People Act 1983 describes what someone requires to be able to vote by post. It says:
''together with such envelopes for their return (whether free of charge or otherwise)''.
That implies that a charge may be introduced in future. If the Bill's objective is to encourage as many people as possible to participate in the electoral process, the possibility that a charge could be introduced would contradict that objective. Will the Minister comment on that?
Ms Harman: The clause allows the returning officer to provide information to the electorate on how to get translations of guidance for voters in different translations and Braille, and to provide visual representations or pictograms; versions of the directions that clarify how to vote by post. That might be through a hyperlink or internet address. This is deep stuff. A pictogram might be on a hyperlink to a web page containing foreign language or audio versions of the instructions or a phone number for the local electoral services department, which might well be needed.
The clause also makes a change regarding the postal voting statement—replacing the current declaration of identity, which needs to be signed by the elector only—which is to be issued with the postal ballot, and is prescribed in secondary legislation.
I will write to my hon. Friend about—[Interruption.] Apparently there is no intention to charge, but I will have to give him further information about that in due course.
Clause 35 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 36
Tendered votes in certain circumstances
Mr. Heath: I beg to move amendment No. 9, in clause 36, page 44, line 38, at end insert—
'''(1ZF) If a person applies for a ballot paper and it seems to the presiding officer or a clerk that he is entitled to a tendered ballot paper under this rule, the presiding officer or clerk shall inform him of the circumstances under which he can cast a tendered ballot paper.''.'.
My amendment would simply put a duty on the presiding officer, or a clerk, to ensure that someone who is not entitled to vote in a normal way is made aware that they are entitled to a tendered vote. It is not an onerous duty, but it seems to be appropriate; more so than a situation in which someone turns up at a polling station expecting to vote but finds out that they cannot, for reasons set out in the clause, and walks away although they are entitled to a tendered vote. If such a person made an application, the presiding officer would be obliged, under the clause, to make the necessary arrangements for them to do so. That is the purpose of the amendment, which I hope the Minister will agree is appropriate.
Mr. Djanogly: The amendment seems to be a helpful one that would add clarity to an area that might not be clear to electors.
David Cairns: The clause, which we will no doubt discuss in the stand part debate, extends the
Column Number: 117
circumstances under which a tendered vote may be issued. There are two new circumstances in which that may happen, the first of which is when an elector attends a polling station to vote and discovers that they are included on the list of postal voters and so are not entitled to vote in person at the polling station, but denies having applied for a postal vote.
The other new circumstance is when a postal voter has lost or has not received their ballot papers and it is too late for them to apply for a replacement set. Under the proposed package of secondary legislation, the deadline for applying for a new set of papers in that situation will be extended to 5 pm on polling day. An elector who has lost their original papers and misses the deadline for obtaining a new set, may present themselves at their polling station in their constituency before the close of poll and apply for a tendered vote.
The purpose of the amendment is to insert a new paragraph into rule 40 to provide that where a person applies for a ballot paper and it seems to the presiding officer that he is entitled to a tendered ballot paper under that rule, the presiding officer shall inform him of the circumstances under which he can cast a tendered vote.
1.45 pm
I appreciate that electors might find the question whether they are entitled to a tendered vote confusing, on the face of it, but we are empowering the presiding officers to ask voters certain statutory questions, some of which are designed to ascertain whether a person is entitled to a tendered vote. A person who satisfactorily answers certain questions put by the presiding officer may indeed, as the hon. Gentleman said, be entitled to a tendered vote.
Under paragraph 7 of schedule 1 to the Bill, we are extending the questions that the presiding officer may put to cover the new circumstances, under the clause, in which a tendered vote may be issued. The questions permitted vary depending on the circumstances of the person applying for a tendered vote and will now include ''Did you apply to vote by post?'' and ''Why have you not voted by post?'' Furthermore, there is nothing to prevent polling station staff from offering information to electors if that is thought appropriate. They will, if it is deemed necessary, be able to explain to voters the rules governing tendered votes.
That is a long way of saying that we entirely sympathise with the point that the hon. Gentleman is making, and are in fact extending the circumstances in which a person is entitled to a tendered vote. It would be odd, therefore, if we did not want to make the relevant people's entitlement known. However, there are statutory questions that should be asked of the individual to establish their entitlement. It is important that that procedure should be uniform. Thereafter, the question of Electoral Commission guidance will probably kick in.
We are with the hon. Gentleman in spirit, but do not see a need for the amendment, because we are trying to enhance the availability of tendered ballot papers to people in the circumstances that I have
Column Number: 118
outlined. In the light of that I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw the amendment.
Mr. Heath: That was a helpful response. We share the wish to maximise the number of people who could take advantage of the relevant paragraph. It is still slightly odd, given that the questions that a presiding officer can ask of a voter are so carefully prescribed—they are laid down, and the list is precise, not permissive—that the first question is not ''Do you realise that you can apply for a tendered vote?'' That is not one of the questions that can be asked; it can be asked only when an application has been made by the voter.
I accept that in practice most presiding officers will probably do as I have suggested; they will not look in the rule book and think ''Gosh, I am not sure whether I can ask whether this person knows the electoral law, and whether they have read schedule 1 to the 1983 Act recently, to inform themselves that they have a tendered vote.'' They will take it as read that they are doing their duty if they make the person concerned aware of the situation. However, that is not explicit in the Bill; in fact, the reverse is almost explicit. Because prescribed questions are to be asked, there is an inference that other questions are not to be asked as part of the process.
Will the Minister reconsider the matter to see whether clarification can be included in the code of guidance? If so, and provided that everyone is clear that what I have described should happen, there is no purpose to my amendment. Nevertheless, it would not unduly hurt the Bill if it were accepted, so that the Minister's intention would be made clear. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 36 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
| 
