| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire): It would be interesting to conduct research to discover how many people were missing from the registers at the recent general election, and the extent of the inaccuracies that developed between mid-February, when the new registers started to operate, and the election date. Already, by 1 May, many people had moved and people had died. A host of problems had entered the registers in that short time. It would be interesting to have that information in addition to the Hansard Society information--the 16 per cent. figure--which is about 10 years old.
Mr. Maclennan: I agree, and I hope that in this short debate the hon. Gentleman will take the opportunity of developing the point. Obviously, we should have an accurate rolling register. That would be a suitable matter for the electoral commission that I recommended to embark on as soon as possible. It would help if we had the Government's acceptance of the principle of a rolling register in the life of this Parliament--even if, understandably, they were not able to say now how they proposed to bring that about.
Liberal Democrats also attach importance to the constitutional matter of the triggering of elections. The power of the Crown--or the power that is exercised in the name of the Crown, by royal prerogative--to call elections is inappropriate and highly anomalous in a modern democracy. It is time seriously to contemplate fixed-term Parliaments. We advocate fixed-term Parliaments of four years. We think it inappropriate that, in the political race, one competitor should fire the starting gun of an election, and we advocate that, as part of the agenda for reform, the new Government should seriously consider that proposal.
In our view, the issue of misleading descriptions on nomination papers, on which the hon. Member for West Bromwich, East--who spoke so eloquently--focused, is a matter of urgent importance. My hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Mr. Oaten), with whose position we all sympathise at this time and who is unable to be in the Chamber now because of the pressures of his situation and a current court case, faced a candidate described as the "Liberal Democrat Top choice for Parliament". No doubt that description was designed to deceive, although I cannot say whether it had an effect on the outcome. It is unsatisfactory that such an element can be introduced into a debate, and it is important to emphasise that the sufferers are not only candidates but electors, who above all should be clear about their true choices.
One proposal to emerge from the all-party discussions was to enable reference to be made to a judge in chambers as soon as nominations were received, by any party who
considered that the description of a candidate was misleading. The case would be heard as a matter of priority. I remain of the view that that is a practical proposition. The Home Office and the Lord Chancellor's Department should have been able to come up with a more compelling response to the proposal.
Mr. Anthony Steen (Totnes):
At the last election in Totnes, a candidate stood as the "Local Conservative". He was both local and a paid-up member of the Conservative party. In other words, he was standing for what he was. Perhaps that poses a greater difficulty than a candidate's intentions. If someone intends to deceive, that is one thing; if his intention is to stand for what he is, that is surely quite another.
Mr. Maclennan:
Parties must determine whether a candidate is entitled to present himself as an official candidate, and there ought to be some sign whether he enjoys that entitlement on the ballot paper. My proposed electoral commission should be able to deal with such matters--but we do not want to wait for a final solution. The problem is relatively straightforward.
It may be difficult to judge intentions to deceive, but I remind the House of what happened at Hillhead. My noble Friend Lord Jenkins stood as a candidate there, and someone styling himself Roy Jenkins appeared on the ballot paper ahead of my noble Friend's name. There can be little doubt that the whole exercise was designed to pull the wool over the electors' eyes. What is required is speedy recourse to the courts.
What really counts is the will of the Government. There are doubtless several ways in which the problem could be tackled.
Mrs. Teresa Gorman (Billericay):
I support what the hon. Member for West Bromwich, East (Mr. Snape) has said. Like him, I had a bogus candidate standing against me who sought to deceive the electors by calling himself the "Loyal Conservative", as opposed to the official Conservative. Like the hon. Gentleman, too, I distinguish between two types of bogus candidate--those seeking to deplete the number of votes given to the official candidate and those seeking publicity.
The hon. Gentleman used the famous example of the Monster Raving Loony party. What he omitted to say was that, for the £500 deposit that they put up, those people get about £8,000--worth of free postage and an enormous amount of invaluable free publicity. If they happen to be in the entertainment business, putting on gigs, that will boost their audiences and put a great deal of money in their pockets.
Like the hon. Gentleman, I have thought it a good idea before now to bring this matter before the House. I followed with great interest the debate initiated by the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore), who faced a "Loyal Labour" party candidate who took 2,500 of his votes. It was said in that debate that the candidate did not set foot outside his house but picked up all those votes by virtue of his description and position on the ballot paper.
That was some slight comfort to me, because the so-called Loyal Conservative in my constituency picked up 3,000-odd votes. He also chose the prime Conservative bits of the constituency and deluged them with propaganda--to the extent that people living there thought that I had done a runner and that the official candidate had changed. That was reflected in the number of spoilt ballot papers; people did not know whom to vote for, or whether I was dead or alive--
Mr. Snape:
If the hon. Lady is trying to tell us that the bogus candidate out-publicised her, I can only say that he must be a remarkable character.
Mrs. Gorman:
I shall take that as a compliment.
I see that the press are always here waiting to pounce on our peccadillos, which reminds me that there was a time in my colourful past when I stood as an independent candidate. In 1974, my platform was "Less government, less taxes and more choice". Like most of my colleagues, therefore, I like to claim that I was a forerunner of the Thatcher revolution.
I have been to discuss this matter with the Minister concerned--whom I thank for his courtesy--the hon. Member for Knowsley, North and Sefton, East (Mr. Howarth). He was extremely accommodating and sympathetic, and assured me that the Government take the matter seriously and are contemplating legislation that may deal with it. I compliment the Government on that. Bogus candidates seem to multiply at national and local elections.
The £50 deposit was introduced in 1918 under the Representation of the People Act. Incidentally, that Act also enfranchised women. I offer that by way of a nice little reminder of the not-too-distant past. The deposit was introduced because bogus candidates were reaching saturation point. As the deposit becomes less significant financially, so the number of candidates will always increase. Some people may think £500 a lot of money these days, but it is peanuts compared with £50 in 1918--that was a very great deal of money then. Even into the 1980s, as many as 17 candidates, most of them bogus, stood in constituencies such as Bermondesy and Chesterfield. Although each one may pick up only a few hundred votes, together they add up to a great many.
Another problem that we face is the difficulty of actually confronting bogus candidates. As the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch said, his challenger did not set foot outside his front door, and there was no reason to believe that anyone was canvassing in the area. So there needs to be a time lag between the handing in of nomination papers and final registration. There must be enough time to let people to get to court--a process which itself is fraught with difficulties.
The obvious parallel is the register of company names and trademarks. If the official names or titles, "Conservative" or "Labour", supplemented by "Tory" or "Socialist"--
Mrs. Gorman:
That used to be the Government's policy, but I am no longer sure. They seem to have become pseudo-Conservatives, so perhaps they should register that as well.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |