Examination of Witnesses (Questions 520
- 539)
TUESDAY 7 JULY 1998
MR GEORGE
HOWARTH, MRS
GAY CATTO
AND MR
STEVE LIMPKIN
520. Are you aware that they do anything about
it, seriously?
(Mr Howarth) Mr Limpkin is champing to get in here,
so I will bring him in, in a moment, but I think arrangements
are made with the Prison Service to remind those who are on remand
or unsentenced of their rights; whether or not that has been effective,
perhaps Mr Limpkin would like to say a word about it.
(Mr Limpkin) There is a standard procedure in advance
of each election whereby my section in the Home Office notifies
colleagues in the Prison Service and the Prison Service then issues
a general circular. It is, in fact, the responsibility of wing
officers to bring that notice to the attention of relevant prisons,
and to assist prisoners, if they need assistance, in identifying
to whom they should apply both to register and to obtain a postal
vote. Wing officers are not supposed to assist prisoners to cast
their vote but there are procedures within Prison Service Standing
Rules which require that postal votes should not be opened on
their way out, as part of the normal censor checks. So, yes, there
is a standard procedure, which kicks in prior to elections, of
notification between ourselves and Prison Service.
521. The Prison Reform Trust, Minister, with
my support let it be said, has been arguing that convicted prisoners
should be eligible to vote; is this something you are looking
at, or not?
(Mr Howarth) No.
522. British overseas voters, if we may move
on to there, the figures for this are quite astonishing. Last
year, just 23,583 people living overseas registered; that was
extended, about 1989, I think, from memory, from five years to
20, on the grounds that there are hundreds of thousands, if not
millions, of people, panting around the Commonwealth to keep casting
their votes. The evidence runs totally counter to that. Are you
contemplating reducing that qualifying period from the present
20 years?
(Mr Howarth) No. We will look at it, if any significant
pressures to do so emerge, but at this stage I do not believe
there is any pressure in that direction. Just to confirm some
of the figures, we believe that there are about three million
British citizens overseas, and 17,315 were on the 1998 register;
as you say, that was the lowest since the 20-year rule was introduced
in 1991. There was a drop of 6,000 from 1997. And the highest
ever was 34,454 in 1991, and we think that probably it will decrease
over time. We have not got any official figures as to how many
have voted in any one general election. I suppose it would be
possible to make an educated guess on them, on a constituency-by-constituency
basis, but we have not undertaken to do that. Twenty years, frankly,
is an arbitrary time limit; some will maintain links for 20 years,
others will not. And, certainly, I do not think any money has
been spent aimed at overseas electors, for example, on advertising
there, and certainly not in recent years, to my knowledge.
Mr Corbett: If it is any help to you, Minister,
I think about five overseas voters exercised their vote in my
constituency.
Mr Cranston: For you or against you?
Mr Corbett
523. I do not know. Finally, Minister, double
registration. For reasons we understand, people can be on two
distinct registers. Do you think there is a case for requiring
them to declare in advance, as far as Parliamentary elections
are concerned, in which constituency they are going to cast that
vote?
(Mr Howarth) It is an issue we want to look at in
the process of examining how we implement rolling registration.
For example, students, who are those mostly affected, although
it is not exclusively students, could change their registration
from term to term. But it is certainly something we need to ensure
against, whilst it is perfectly legitimate to double register,
it is not legitimate to double vote and we need to ensure that
that is made as difficult as possible. But I think it is difficult
to get round the fact that some people have a legitimate claim
to register to vote in two areas, I think probably many of us
in this room are in the same position, and I do not see why we
should remove that right from people, it is a matter of their
choice as to which area they choose to vote in.
Chairman: Thank you. Now we are going to just
skip ahead for a moment, because Mr Malins has to go, to candidates
who use misleading descriptions, but we will come back to one
or two other matters in a moment. Mr Malins.
Mr Malins
524. Minister, I would like to talk to you about
party labels and descriptions at the moment. In the last general
election, the Returning Officer in Woking accepted a nomination
from a man who used his correct name but described himself as
"Official Conservative Party Candidate", which he was
not. Can you firstly confirm the Returning Officer was entitled
to accept that, at that stage?
(Mr Howarth) Yes.
525. Secondly, could you say whether or not,
under proposals put forward by the Government, and hopefully to
be made law, the Returning Officer would be, I use the word with
care, entitled to do so next time?
(Mr Howarth) I do not think he would be entitled.
526. On what basis would he not be entitled?
(Mr Howarth) If, as I assume they will, the Conservative
Party were to register—well, there are two aspects to it.
One is that I think, I am almost certain, that the parties represented
in the Committee will choose to register under the procedures
laid down in the Bill itself, but even if they did not, if the
Returning Officer considered that to be a misleading description
then he would be in a position where it would be perfectly legitimate
to rule that candidate out.
527. That applied last time, Minister, as well,
did it not?
(Mr Howarth) No, but the difference there is, as I
say, I assume that the Conservative Party will register the name
"Conservative". That then gives them prior claim on
that title, and anybody who chose to use some variation on that—we
have debated this when the Bill was in its Standing Committee.
For example, just to take it a step further, I would consider,
if somebody, in any constituency, chose to describe themselves
as the Tory Party, that should be then considered to be a misleading
description.
528. I asked if he would be entitled to, Minister,
and the answer clearly is that he would, because you are giving
the Returning Officer a subjective judgement?
(Mr Howarth) Yes, but we are also giving him armoury,
in the form of the Registration of Political Parties—
529. He had it before.
(Mr Howarth) To make a judgement against—there
is a party known, in this case, as the Conservative Party and
anybody who would describe themselves as The Official Conservative
Party Candidate would, inevitably, be seeking to mislead the electorate,
and in those circumstances it would be my view that any Returning
Officer, assuming that the Conservative Party was registered,
would be bound to rule that title out, not the candidate.
530. The position is that, in my view, the Returning
Officer still has rather an amount of discretion here. The Returning
Officer is not qualified judicially or in any other respect to
pass, in my view, an important judgement. Do you foresee the slightest
possibility that the Returning Officer in a constituency could
form a view which was unsatisfactory to one of the main parties,
and if you could foresee that why not have some form of appeal
against it?
(Mr Howarth) In those circumstances—let me just
add, you can, as somebody once famously said, never say never,
but I do not envisage that that will happen.
531. But if it did?
(Mr Howarth) But, just for the purposes of argument,
that if it did happen then I would think that any case that was
put into the court system which—
Mr Malins: No, forget the court system, we know
the price, we know the delays, we know the problems; what is there,
when the Returning Officer, perhaps for reasons that are not satisfactory,
accepts a nomination which, in the real world, most people do
not like because it is confusing, misleading, where is the appeal
from him, apart from the law courts, at huge expense?
Chairman
532. It would be a candidate for your Electoral
Commission, would it not, assuming it ever comes to pass?
(Mr Howarth) Indeed, Mr Chairman, but since at this
stage we have not decided whether it will come to pass I do not
think it would be appropriate for me to use that as a—
533. It is a possibility, is it not?
(Mr Howarth) It is a helpful comment, Mr Chairman.
I think, that problem, that Mr Malins has just described, is precisely
the problem we are trying to deal with. It is a fairly obvious
case, where somebody uses the name of a party that they clearly
do not represent, but there is also the use of deliberately misleading,
the obvious case was the Literal Democrat candidate.
Mr Malins
534. A similar question, yes; but I am on the
Returning Officer. Have you read my brother's article in Bar Council
magazine, I sent it to all the Ministers, it sets out a very,
very good series of suggestions?
(Mr Howarth) It has not reached me yet, but, as a
result of you suggesting it to me, you can be assured that I will.
535. Will you look out for it?
(Mr Howarth) I will, yes.
536. Confirm that you have read it, and what
you think of his observations?
(Mr Howarth) I will follow that up, yes.
Mr Malins: Will you; thank you.
Mr Russell
537. Chairman, I wonder if I could invite the
Minister to further put Mr Malins' worries to rest, will you confirm
that he will be secure next time in the knowledge that he will
be allowed to have alongside his name and his party name his party
logo?
(Mr Howarth) It is a very helpful point. One of the
things that it does enable is the use of party logos on the ballot
paper; so, yes, that will be helpful. I might add, by the way,
that I think one of the concerns we have, and discussed earlier,
in which I think the use of logos is helpful, is people, for example,
with partial-sightedness; whilst it might not be easy to read
the print, it might be easier to pick out the party logo, and
I think it will help in that direction as well.
538. But still continuing with the point that
was made earlier, the Returning Officers are still going to be
left with this problem, because the Registration of Political
Parties Bill already agreed does not exactly close all the loopholes,
as has been indicated there?
(Mr Howarth) Which loophole did you have in mind?
539. The fact is that, because there is no common
decision-making across the country, it is possible that a Returning
Officer, rightly or wrongly, could allow through a name, that
is what is being suggested?
(Mr Howarth) Well, yes, but, my own view is that what
Returning Officers have to work from is legislation. I think the
legislation makes it clear. The problem in the past has been that
it was not illegal, it was perfectly acceptable under law; it
might have been wildly unacceptable for anybody to call themselves
anything they wanted, in terms of party labels, and we have had
repeated difficulties with the Literal Democrat candidates. In
the most recent local elections in my own constituency, we have
had people variously calling themselves Real Labour, New Labour,
Old Labour, and The Labour Party Candidate; and all of them, in
some way, apart from the actual Labour candidate, have sought
to appropriate the name, a label, which has a specific meaning
to most people in the electorate. That is the phenomenon we are
seeking to deal with. I believe that the Bill itself and the system
that it brings in will solve that problem, and I doubt very much
whether Returning Officers will exercise their discretion, small
though it is, in the way that you describe.
|
