| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
5.44 pm
Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby): I should like to raise an amendment that should be made to the regulations but which, I regret, is not being made. I have raised the issue with Home Office Ministers three times during the past five years.
The names Ian Gow, Airey Neave and Robert Bradford will be well known to hon. Members. They have all been murdered by the IRA since 1979. The devices that murdered the first two were planted at their homes. It is unwise of the House to demand that candidates in parliamentary and other elections should give their normal home address on nomination papers and ballot papers. It is said that that furthers democracy, but I do not understand how the death of an hon. Member furthers democracy.
A party other than the Conservatives may be in government at some stage, although I would regret that. That party would then discover the problems. I understand that Lord Mason still has protection against the IRA. I recall Lord Fitt having to hold off a gang of people with a revolver at the top of his stairs. In all those cases, terrorist organisations have attacked hon. Members. Ulster Unionist Members will be only too well aware of the threats that they live with every day.
We should not make a gift to terrorist organisations--the IRA or others. There are other terrorist organisations that might want to kill hon. Members. It is foolish for us to have to give our home addresses. That is a gift to a terrorist who wants to find out where an hon. Member lives. A terrorist will baulk at the idea of having to ferret around for the information. Of course, anybody can find where any of us lives if they try hard enough, but if we make it more difficult, attacks are less likely. I regret that it is likely that there will be further attacks.
Before the last general election, the then Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Mole Valley (Mr. Baker) tried to introduce regulations on this subject. The Liberal Democrats--notable on this occasion, as often, for their absence--said that that was unacceptable and would undermine democracy. I say again that I do not understand how the death of any hon. Member from whatever party improves democracy. I very much hope that, in future, we will amend the regulations so that candidates do not have to give their home addresses.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Janet Fookes):
I think that the hon. Gentleman has sat down. I was about to make to him a point that I shall make to the House. His comments went beyond the regulations before us. Although I do not mind passing references that go beyond the regulations, the House would be ill advised to dwell on them.
Mr. William Ross (East Londonderry):
This is the second tranche of these little orders to come before us in the past 10 days. The first few relating to Northern Ireland were considered last week, and dealt with the sums that candidates may spend. I noticed that, in that debate, everybody seemed to miss the fact that, in a proportional representation election in Northern Ireland, a party that puts up five or six candidates has five or six lots of expenses to play around with. Those on the two Front Benches should keep that in mind when they complain about the sums that are sometimes available.
I have also noticed, from last week's regulations and from today's fistful, that we seem to be getting into a complex area, with constant reviews and updatings of electoral law. From what the Minister has said, some of the measures that we are passing will not take effect in time for the general election. I therefore suggest that serious attention should be given in the next Parliament to the consolidation of electoral law in one easily obtained book, which is updated, so that we do not have to plough through one little regulation after another for years back.
In last year's election, it was impossible to obtain certain elements of electoral law, and some people standing in the election did not know what the law was. I see that the Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office, the right hon. Member for Westminster, North (Sir J. Wheeler), is on the Government Front Bench. I hope that the Government will take on board the need to consolidate and reprint the regulations quickly after the general election.
The Minister said that the change of time scale for postal vote applications was necessary because the time was tight for electors. We all appreciate that--in view of the number of complaints that every political party must deal with. I do not know whether the general election will be on 1 May, but I understand that there is to be a local election on that day. The local election in Northern Ireland, however, is three weeks later, so we shall have to start electioneering at the beginning of April and be at it for nearly two months. We shall all be rather weary of it by the time it ends. One thing is certain: all those who miss the postal vote the first time round will want to vote at the local election, so we at least have two bites of the cherry. I am therefore grateful for the extra two days.
I hope that the Minister has reflected on the fact that, although we shall make matters easier for electors, we shall make them more difficult for staff of the returning officers. Rather than saving money, the tighter time scale means that we shall have to employ more people in electoral offices.
I listened with interest to what the Minister said about the changes in the attestation. The application forms will clearly be different and the changes with regard to nurses' qualifications will have an effect. One sometimes wonders whether all the changes are beneficial. I hope, therefore, that nurses' names, addresses and qualifications will be put down and be checkable.
On the Local Elections (Northern Ireland) (Amendment) Order, will the Minister clarify who will be registered? When we are dealing with nursing and residential homes, will the manager of a home where electors are resident have to register, or will the manager of the group of homes--certain firms now run a large number of homes--be considered to be in charge of the home? To whom does the legislation apply? We urgently need that information, which applies throughout the United Kingdom.
The Minister pointed out that one of the changes to the British legislation simply brought this side of the Irish sea into line with legislation in Northern Ireland. Is it not time that electoral law for general elections was exactly the same throughout the kingdom? Could not consolidation of the legislation be done with that in mind? We are sometimes weary of the little differences that appear. We see no good reason for them, and I therefore hope that the Government, or their successors, will take on board what I am saying and do what is necessary to bring legislation in Northern Ireland and Great Britain into line.
The Representation of the People (Northern Ireland) (Amendment) Regulations are clearly different from the regulations that apply to England, Wales and Scotland. I wondered why, but the Minister clarified that matter in her opening remarks. Will she confirm that, despite the different wording in the regulations that apply to Northern Ireland, they have exactly the same effect when it comes to the practicalities of elections?
I confess that I read the Great Britain regulations 2(2) and simply could not understand. It seemed to say that there was a delay of three months. Does that allow regulation 4(4) to come into effect immediately? The first part of the paragraphs seemed to say one thing but the second part seemed to say something different. Will the Minister clarify that?
I very much regret that the regulations do not oblige the chief electoral officer of Northern Ireland to keep a record of persons refused a ballot paper because they do not have proper identification. That bone of contention with the electors and political parties in Northern Ireland has run for years. Every time we raise it after an election at which a large number of people have complained, we are told, "Oh, those people might go away and come back." Our experience is that if people are refused a ballot, paper because they do not have the correct piece of paper in their hand, they do not come back. We must therefore look once more at having a single piece of identification--an identity card--that could be used across the board.
May I say to the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, North (Mr. Henderson), who spoke on behalf of the Labour party, that, although a rolling register is an
attractive idea at first sight, if he lived in Northern Ireland he might take a distinctly different view because of the activities of Sinn Fein-IRA. I assure him that if one opens the door to frauds that could be perpetrated in one part of the kingdom, the door does not close; it opens right across the kingdom.
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire):
One of the advantages of the electoral registration system in Northern Ireland is that there is a full canvass for checking that the correct people are on the register. If that were extended to England, Wales and Scotland, the registration figures there would increase considerably. That means that a rolling register would not have the serious implications for Northern Ireland that the hon. Gentleman fears.
Mr. Ross:
I agree with the first part of the hon. Gentleman's comments, but not the second. We examined those matters at the meetings some parties attended in the Home Office. I was a representative of my party. The Minister is well aware of those meetings, at which a number of serious objections were thrown up. She might like to expand on them so that the hon. Gentleman is better informed.
5.47 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |