| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
6.15 pm
Mr. Wilshire: Before the hon. and learned Gentleman finishes, may I ask him, as an eminent lawyer, to help me out of a legal difficulty? He appears to be suggesting that in wanting his name to remain, he is really standing as
himself. I am pleased to see that. However, my understanding of a political party is that it consists of more than one person. It seems like a legal conundrum if an individual stands as himself, keeping his name, yet also stands as a party. I am sure that there is a wonderful explanation, and I think that we would benefit from hearing it.
Mr. McCartney: I must take the scales from the eyes of the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire), who seems to have an intellectual difficulty. That difficulty should be ascribed to the procedures that the Government have offered for the election, rather than to me. If I am to contest the election I have a twofold function. First, there is the question of being elected as a constituency representative in one's own constituency; then there are the bonus brownie points--the possibility of collecting two additional seats from the 20 freebies that are undemocratically oscillating in the distance, even in my own seat of North Down. It therefore becomes necessary for me to become somewhat diffuse and to form myself into a party, so that I can have listed members in a constituency and people will have the opportunity to vote for me in that constituency. I could then boost my Province-wide vote, creep unwillingly into the top 10, and secure an additional two seats.
Mr. Kevin McNamara (Kingston upon Hull, North): By virtue of the amendment that has been accepted, the hon. and learned Gentleman will now have to stand in more than one constituency.
Mr. McCartney: I accept that under amendment No. 47, I will have not only to bifurcate but to triplicate--[Interruption.] I shall try to jump over the four and get into the five bracket, at least.
For the reasons that I have explained, it has become necessary for me to describe myself as a party. But--the hon. Member for Spelthorne has finally tumbled to the fact--because of the format of the election I shall have to have other people in other constituencies. That is why I have, as it were, turned myself into a company.
Mr. Wilshire:
A limited company?
Mr. McCartney:
Unlimited, for the purpose of the election. I hope that that explanation will assist the hon. Gentleman in his deliberations.
Mr. William Ross:
This has been an entertaining debate, but it has been entertaining simply because of the farcical situation that faces us. I was rather sorry that the hon. and learned Member for North Down did not give way to me earlier--we have all been giving way to one another a lot--because if he had I would have tried to assure him that we would not in any way try to down him as a minnow. What we wanted was a system that accurately portrayed the party, so that the electorate to whom he was appealing would know clearly for whom they were voting. We would not want any of his votes to go astray.
Mr. McCartney:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Ross:
No, I shall not return the pleasure.
At the end of the day, the farcical situation concerns a very serious subject. The amendments highlight the confusing nature of some of the names now being used. I have no doubt that if the matter is forced to a vote we shall carry the Liberal Democrats with us, because they have the most vivid memories of the "Literal Democrats". I would have thought that, in this case at least, they would want to ensure that a sensible arrangement is made.
The Liberal Democrats, like hon. Members in every other party in the House, are aware that an argument has been raging on the subject at United Kingdom level for several years. A Home Office committee has been trying to resolve the question of party names and the right of individuals to them. The legal position on party names in the United Kingdom was set out by my hon. Friend the Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble). I commend his remarks to the House because this is a serious issue. People are reputed to be changing their names to challenge sitting candidates. There is no end to the ramifications. This is a United Kingdom problem that must be resolved in a sensible fashion so that people know for whom, and for what policies, they are voting.
I was astonished at some of the remarks in the debate. We were told about the system of letters coming into the Northern Ireland office. Hon. Members will know about two parties that are missing: the Ulster Popular Unionist party, whose sole Member of Parliament died some time ago--
Mr. Trimble:
It still has two councillors.
Mr. Ross:
My hon. Friend tells me that that party still has two councillors, but its name does not appear on this list so it is apparently prepared to give up the ghost. The Ulster Liberals seem to have vanished into the mists of time--there is no sign of them. However, two parties that should have appeared on the list are missing. First, there is that wonderful character who keeps writing to hon. Members and signs himself "anonymous". There is also the writer of unsigned letters. We do not have anonymous or unsigned on the list. I wonder how they come to be missing. I am not too worried because they will probably turn up before we get to the end of this process.
Mr. Peter Robinson:
There was a statement in the newspapers a few weeks ago that the Ulster Popular Unionist party has decided to close. I think that there are now two independents, while one member wisely joined the Democratic Unionist party
Mr. Ross:
He is no doubt hoping to be elected. Let us see how he gets on.
Mr. McNamara:
Has not the hon. Gentleman missed out disgusted of Tunbridge Wells?
Mr. Ross:
He does not live in Northern Ireland. We also miss the United Kingdom Labour party.
Mr. John D. Taylor (Strangford):
And the Irish Republican Socialist party.
Mr. Ross:
We are also missing the IRSP but I do not want to go on with this because I am getting too far from the amendment.
The House will have noticed at least six parties that use the name Unionist in their title in the list in the Bill. That is because of the connotations and attractions of that name in Northern Ireland. It is attractive because it sets out the basic philosophy of the great preponderance of folk who live in Northern Ireland--hence the use of the term "Official Unionist" when there have been quarrels within the body of the Unionist party about who was the correctly selected candidate.
Every party has its rallying banner. For the Unionist electorate, it is the word "Unionist". There might be a blue torch or a red rose overhead. For the DUP, there is not only the word "Unionist" but the name of its leader. The name of the hon. Member for North Down (Mr. McCartney) also features. The SDLP has its preferred option. No doubt the Alliance party would want its name to appear on a yellow background. Those things are used by parties as aids to electoral success. That is why they want to use specific titles and symbols. They should be all treated exactly the same. Whatever is put down for one party should be put down for the others. This debate draws that problem to the attention of the Government and we expect some action from them to ensure that all parties enter the process on a level playing field and that there will be no attempts to confuse the electorate.
Mr. Robert McCartney:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Ross:
I shall give way if the hon. and learned Gentleman will allow me to finish this point. I tabled an amendment, which was sadly not selected, saying that the Secretary of State should have the right to refuse a party.
The Chairman:
Order. The hon. Gentleman knows that if an amendment is not selected he cannot talk about it.
Mr. Ross:
If the Government had considered the possibility of refusing to accept names which might have caused confusion and taken upon themselves the full weight of the burden that they have partially accepted, the merits of the view that I was trying to express would have been apparent. That might have been the way around the problem of confusing names on the list. Some of the names, which I believe are figments of the imagination of certain individuals, would not have appeared on the list. They would have had to appear as independents or under another name.
Mr. Robert McCartney:
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way. Can he think of anything less than confusing to the electorate of Northern Ireland than a candidate standing under his own name?
Mr. Ross:
The hon. Gentleman should examine the telephone book: he would find a dozen other Robert McCartneys.
Miss Kate Hoey (Vauxhall):
We are breaking much new ground with the elections in Northern Ireland and their procedures and we are changing the rules as we go. As far as possible, we should try to stick to some basic principles. One basic principle is that political parties of whatever shape or form should have the right to call
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |