Examination of Witnesses (Questions 560
- 579)
TUESDAY 7 JULY 1998
MR GEORGE
HOWARTH, MRS
GAY CATTO
AND MR
STEVE LIMPKIN
560. Do you think there is more risk of abuse
through the proxy voting system than there is through the postal
voting system?
(Mr Howarth) There is a small amount of evidence that
there have been problems with it, there have been some court cases,
I think one was in Cynon Valley, in a local authority election,
and there have been a number of allegations arising out of the
last general election that in some parts of the country there
have been problems with proxy voting, and I think it is something
we have to keep a very careful eye on.
561. Looking now at the question of polling
stations and early voting, arrangements which give voters a choice
of where to vote, such as alternative polling stations or mobile
stations, would require local authorities to have the register
available on line in order to prevent double voting. Do you think
this is technically feasible? We obviously cannot ask Mr Limpkin
because he is not too conversant with the IT business.
(Mr Howarth) I might say, my children could probably
answer that question better than me, but I think it probably is
feasible. It would depend on whether or not the polling stations
themselves were sufficiently well serviced to have the right equipment
available, and it could indeed be a fairly expensive process.
But I think one of the things that we would like to pilot, if
we are given the legislative freedom to do so, would be different
kinds of polling stations, more accessible ones, and maybe those
sorts of arrangements could be piloted, i.e. the use of technology.
To take the point that was made, if you are going to have, for
example, a shopping centre as a polling station then it would
be absolutely essential either that you had all the manual registers
available or, more easily, possibly, that you could have an on-line
arrangement, so that somebody could turn up and say, "I'm
so-and-so from so-and-so; here is my polling card", or whatever,
and that could be cross-referenced electronically. I think, obviously,
that would be a useful development, but it is not the only way
of doing it.
(Mr Limpkin) May I just interpose. On the original
question about whether or not it is feasible to have a register
on line, the responses which came through from the DETR consultation
paper, which Mr Howarth's Working Party considered in respect
to electoral matters, seemed to indicate very clearly that of
the 310 local authorities who responded none of them are currently
in a position to put their register on line. However, a number
of authorities did suggest that within a matter of 12 to 18 months
they might expect to be able to run it on line, and indeed were
beginning to look to see whether or not the polling stations which
they might use would have the necessary modems to carry an interactive
IT link. So it is only from those about two-thirds of local authorities,
I think, who actually responded that we get the impression, but
it does seem as if nobody is quite ready to go yet. Although I
think Dudley suggested they might be ready round about this time
next year and would be happy to run a pilot.
562. Mobile voting and early voting would both
present quite considerable difficulties for the political parties,
given that they are reliant on voluntary funding. To what extent
do you think it is the remit of your Working Party to consider
the right of the voter to take advantage of whatever modern technology
can deliver, as against the needs of the political parties to
be able to organise at election time and present their cases as
effectively as possible?
(Mr Howarth) The rights of the electorate obviously
take precedent over the concerns of political parties. But that
said, our objective is to make the vote and the procedures surrounding
the vote as accessible as possible to as many people as possible.
That said, I think there are two good reasons why we have got
the three main political parties represented on the Working Party;
one is, and I think the officials would probably agree with this,
that there is a body of experience in political parties about
how elections work, as it were, at the coal-face, which is very
useful and adds a great deal to our deliberations. And secondly,
of course, it is important that the practical implications of
any changes that are brought about do take into account, although
not necessarily as an overriding principle, the effect it will
have on political parties. I am not anxious to make life difficult
for political parties, but I am anxious to make life as easy as
possible for electors.
563. We are going to move to a stage where shortly
we can get everything off the Internet, including our weekly shopping.
If it were feasible for us to be able to vote via the Internet,
and all the practical safeguards could be incorporated into that,
in principle would you be in favour of that and if that became
the normal way of voting and it became the exception that people
actually turned up at a polling booth with a stubby pencil to
stick their cross against a name on a piece of paper, where would
you stand on the principle of the matter?
(Mr Howarth) I am loathe to speculate on the principle
of the matter. My innate good sense tells me that we are some
way off the time when we are likely to have that debate. When
the time comes we will have to have the debate. For my own part,
speaking as an individual, I rather like the process of going
into the polling station and casting my vote. I suspect most of
us feel the same way.
564. Yes, I agree with that. Can I just turn
to the idea that we might have an alternative day of the week
for elections; on the Continent they tend to use the weekend.
Given that the European elections take place, and I believe votes
will not be counted until the Sunday, what is your view on having
the elections on other than a Thursday, and particularly weekend
voting?
(Mr Howarth) There are practical problems. The previous
Shadow Home Secretary, Sir Brian Mawhinney, raised some objections
about the matter in a debate we had in the House quite recently.
There are some parts of Scotland and Northern Ireland where I
am aware, for example, voting on a Sunday would cause insurmountable
problems for some people. There are some faiths, for example,
the Jewish faith, particularly people with very strong Orthodox
Jewish beliefs, who would find Saturdays difficult as the day
on which people voted. And then if you actually go through the
days in the week, other than Thursday, you will find that on some
days they are Holy Days of Obligation, on Fridays anybody who
is a follower of Islam might have difficulties, and so on. So
there is no simple solution to it. One argument that has been
put forward that might be a resolution to the problem is the idea
of having maybe voting over two days, so that if you had Saturday
and Sunday anybody who had a difficulty with Sunday could use
Saturday, and anybody who had a difficulty with Saturday could
use Sunday. I think those arguments need to be rehearsed. It is
one issue that we intend to look at. I doubt, frankly, whether
we will, in fact, I can be firmer than that, we will not be considering
a change of day for the next European elections.
Chairman
565. Presumably, there would be high costs involved
in (a) weekend voting anyway, and (b) two days rather than one
day, much higher costs?
(Mr Howarth) I am sure that is true. It is certainly
something we want to look at, but I do not want to hold out—first
of all, taking it over weekends would be, I suspect, more expensive
in terms of what you have to pay people to work, certainly if
you held it over two days it would be twice as costly in terms
of staff time and costs and keeping polling stations open for
longer.
Mr Winnick
566. And a nightmare for the political parties,
two days?
(Mr Howarth) And, indeed, a nightmare. But if I can
just finish off the point about the European elections, the 1999
European elections, I think the difficulty we would have is, we
are changing the system to a regional list system, if we were
to change the day as well, if there are any changes in turnout,
for example, it would be difficult to know which had been the
cause, whether it had been the change of day, whether it had been
the change of system, or whether both factors impacted on it.
So I think it is best that we have that one change and then we
will be able to assess whether it has made any difference to turnout.
Mr Howarth
567. Can I just ask you one final question.
In assessing all these changes that are being proposed to your
Working Party, how important is it to you, as a Minister and as
a politician, that there should be the broadest possible consensus
between the political parties on the eventual outcome to those
deliberations?
(Mr Howarth) I think it is hugely important. There
is a tradition in this country that certainly changes in procedures,
I know there have been constitutional changes that have not always
had a consensus right across the political spectrum, but on changes
in procedures, I think it is important that political parties
do not feel that changes are being made to their disadvantage,
or to the advantage of another party. And it is my approach to
try to build as much consensus as possible, both within the Working
Party and outside the Working Party, between political parties
anyway, because new systems that have the support of all the political
parties, or as many of them as possible, have far more chance
of succeeding in their stated aims than those that are pushed
through without that kind of consensus. So I attach a great deal
of importance to it, and certainly value the contribution that
all of the political parties make to the work of the Working Party
itself.
Mr Linton
568. I just wanted to say, I was a bit dismayed
at what Mr Limpkin said about only, was it, 35 local authorities
were in a position to go on line on the electoral register, and
it might take a year or 18 months, if I heard you right? Because
it strikes me that they could all do it within a week. If you
look at local authority services, the libraries are on line, the
council tax is on line, hire of halls is on line, all of their
services, apart from voting, are already on line, and, nice as
it is that Dudley have volunteered to pilot this project, why
pilot going on line, surely it is something that could be done
at the next election without putting any local authorities into
a sweat at all?
(Mr Limpkin) The responses came from the consultation
paper, and at this stage we cannot really do much more than simply
reflect through what comes from that. It was not a specific question
that was asked, but the authorities responded in fairly detailed
terms to most of the questions. The position, as I understand
it, is that within the electoral registration offices, the register
is indeed, in most cases, already on line and shared between two
or three offices; the difficulty is getting it out to the polling
stations, because polling stations typically use church halls,
school gymnasiums, which may well not have the right connections
in order to be able to do the on-line links. It is an area that,
as we look at electronic voting in more detail, will need to be
thought through, and that is actually something which Mr Howarth's
Working Party has scheduled for later this year, beginning of
next year. So there is a lot more work that needs to be done on
it.
569. And you do not feel there is a danger in
being too gradualistic about this, because local authorities are
very used to providing on-line services, and in this area you
seem to be accepting a very long lead-in time, which the local
authorities would not themselves accept in any of their other
services?
(Mr Howarth) I think it is better to pick up on the
last point, to bring local authorities along with us rather than
dictate to them, and the whole approach that certainly DETR takes
is to build up a partnership approach with local government. Without
commenting on the actual times involved, I think it would be quite
wrong for us to be trying to dictate to local authorities, particularly
since DETR themselves have carried out a consultation exercise;
there is a kind of obligation to take that seriously.
570. But the consultation exercise shows that,
in fact, local authorities are way ahead of you, champing at the
bit; there is a majority, sometimes they have rolling majorities,
in favour of every single line of your proposals?
(Mr Howarth) I was talking particularly in terms of
the point you were raising, which was about electronic voting
and linking up to polling stations; that is an area where this
is how they have responded and this is what we have got to go
on. But I accept that there is enthusiasm. I think, my discussions
with people from local government, whom I met quite recently to
talk about it, that they are very keen indeed, because they are
even more concerned than political parties nationally about the
low and falling turnouts at local elections. So I think to rejuvenate
that process is as much a priority for them as it certainly is
for us, and I appreciate that, and want to co-operate as fully
as possible with them in those endeavours.
Chairman: Bev Hughes. We are returning now to
candidates.
Ms Hughes
571. Just before I do, can I just follow on
from that. Just to say that when we had SOLACE here, and certainly
from my own experience, they did agree that whilst there are some
registration officers very keen to move on then we can also say
perhaps at best there is a great deal of variation in the extent
to which there is commitment and enthusiasm from registration
officers, and that some, at the other end of the spectrum, do
need, I think, a considerable amount of encouragement, amongst
all their other priorities, to take this seriously, and SOLACE
agreed with that point. Would you agree with it?
(Mr Howarth) I think so, and I think it is important
also that the kind of guidance that the Association of Electoral
Registration Officers are issuing, the kind of training that they
are embarking on and developing, I mentioned earlier the Certificate
that they have just developed, I think the work that SOLACE themselves
are involved in, all of which is to be applauded and all of which
we support, and some of which we want ourselves to co-operate
fully with. So, yes, it is an important point.
572. Thank you. Just moving briefly to the question
of the number of candidates at any one election, in any one seat,
and the kind of thresholds we have got at the moment for people
to become candidates and whether they need changing. How big do
you think this issue is, the proliferation of candidates; do you
think it really matters at all, firstly, how many candidates there
are contesting a particular seat, is that an issue that needs
any examination, or restriction?
(Mr Howarth) I think it would be very, very difficult
to envisage any system within a mature democracy that capped the
limit on the number of candidates. It might be sometimes unwieldy
and it might sometimes aggravate those of us who are in mainstream
political parties, but that really should not be an issue; the
issue is whether or not the democratic process is served better
by restricting the number of candidates, and I would have to give
long and hard thought and be persuaded that there were good reasons
for doing that. At the moment, I am not.
573. Do you think perhaps that the democratic
purpose and process would be served if we tried to ensure that
we did only have people standing who were genuinely serious candidates
who wanted to put themselves before the electorate and be elected;
and, if so, would you think there were any arguments for tightening
some of the thresholds that candidates would have to meet? For
instance, increasing the number of signatures they needed to acquire
for a nomination, or increasing the deposit that they would have
to pay if they did not secure a certain percentage of the electorate?
(Mr Howarth) My understanding is that the political
parties take the view that the number of signatures is, frankly,
not, they do not see that as a significant control against abuse,
and they do not see any benefits that would be derived from increasing
the number of assenters. It is not that difficult a job, as we
all probably know, to go round and collect signatures; so maybe
if you increase it to a hundred, or something like that, it might
have some effect, but I do not think it would be that significant
as to prevent frivolous candidates from standing. On the question
of deposits, the current deposit is £500 and the threshold
is 5 per cent at a Parliamentary election, and £1,000 and
5 per cent at a European Parliamentary election; that will change
to £5,000 per list with the new arrangements, and a 2.5 per
cent threshold, under the European Parliamentary Election Bill.
That system was introduced in 1918 and it remained at £150
until it was increased in 1985 to the current level. At June 1997
prices, the £150 deposit would be the equivalent of £4,093,
and the £500 deposit would be the equivalent of £825,
if it had been kept up-to-date with inflation since it was introduced.
I would want to give a lot of thought to whether or not increasing
the threshold, the level of deposit, would perform an effective
role. Clearly, we want to stop, I do not know, double-glazing
companies standing for election so that they can take advantage
of the free post, on the one hand, but what we do not want to
do, on the other, is prevent smaller but serious parties from
being able to stand in elections because they simply could not
find the deposit. So you have got to constantly look for a balance
in these things, and I am not entirely clear that we need at this
stage to consider raising it too much; maybe it should keep pace
with inflation. But, again, we have not got a fixed view on it;
if there are arguments, we would be more than happy to hear them.
But I think it is important that we understand the need not to
make it too difficult for legitimate political strains of thought
to stand at elections, no matter what their chances of election.
574. One view we had put to us was that raising
a deposit to some extent, and there were different views as to
how much, but also lowering the threshold that a party had to
reach, so that it was still at such a level that a small but serious
party could hope to attain but would actually exclude the double-glazing
company, those two together might be a combination that might
meet the requirements here?
(Mr Howarth) I would certainly be interested in any
view, any mix of that kind, provided it did not have the effect
of discouraging serious political parties, that might not have
large-scale support, from standing. It would be invidious to name
any particular party, but I think we can all imagine the sort
of parties I have in mind. But, yes, any work that is done on
that would be of interest to me, and I think of interest to the
Working Party as well.
575. Thank you. Can I just ask you specifically
about the forthcoming European elections, and obviously the fact
that in those constituencies there are several million electors,
and any candidate would have the possibility of a free mailing,
which might be a very attractive proposition not only to some
commercial companies perhaps but perhaps to a single-issue, voluntary
organisation, who would find it quite attractive to get a piece
of paper through that number of people's doors. Does that concern
you and are any steps being taken to regulate or prevent that
happening?
(Mr Howarth) We do want to look at that, but I think,
because the Neill Committee are looking at issues to do with the
amount of money that is spent on elections, it is probably wise,
before we take a view on that, to hear what they have to say.
But it is certainly an area that we can look at, it is not an
area that I think we need to rush into.
576. The timescale for the Neill Committee,
will that be such that it would enable you, if you felt there
needed something to be done, for it to be done in time for the
European elections?
(Mr Howarth) Yes, we could do that. Again, it is the
same principle, I am anxious not to jump to any conclusions, (a)
because it is right and proper that Neill has been set up to look
at that, that we wait and hear what they say, and (b) I do not
want to jump into any arrangements that do disadvantage any serious
party, because we are anxious to weed out commercial interests
exploiting the system for free publicity through the free post
system. So, again, it is about balance, really.
577. And just finally, are you giving any consideration
to reducing the minimum age for candidacy from 21 to 18?
(Mr Howarth) No.
578. It is not even on the agenda for consideration?
(Mr Howarth) If there is a debate to be had on it,
I would not necessarily want to discourage it, but I think we
have got to give a lot of serious thought; usually, there is some
age, it does not necessarily follow that the age at which someone
is considered eligible, appropriate to vote is the same as the
age at which they are suitable to become a candidate. The assumption
has always been that you need somebody of experience before you
could be taken seriously as a potential candidate. I might say
that I was first elected onto a local authority at the age of
21, and with hindsight I am not entirely sure that I should not
have been a bit older before I was elected. But I think a lot
of systems have, I think you have got to be 35 before you can
stand for the Presidency of the United States, somebody will correct
me if I am wrong about that. So there has been that issue for
a very long time, and I suspect we would have to give a lot of
hard and long thought to whether or not we would want people to
be in a position to stand for election at the age of 18. I might
say, there is another consideration as well. I suspect anybody
aged 18 would find it very difficult to get themselves selected
by a political party, I may be wrong about that, there may be
some exceptional people aged 18, but normally speaking I think
it would be pretty unusual.
579. On the other hand, obviously, the proportion
of young people who are participating in all elections is of serious
concern to everybody, and it might be a good message for those
who are able, and there are lots of constraints on 18 year olds,
many of them will be in full-time education, others will be working,
so one would not expect a huge influx of 18 year olds, but it
might be a very positive message, in terms of trying to increase
participation?
(Mr Howarth) I think it is difficult for—on
the one hand, there is the issue about, has somebody got enough
experience at the age of 18 in order to put themselves forward,
seriously or otherwise, for election; that is one issue which
has been a traditional concern and one which I think we would
certainly have to work through. But, on the other hand, I think
the point you make is a valid one. There are messages about encouraging
the participation of young people in the political process; whether
there are other steps along the way that could send out that message
I certainly want to explore, but at this stage it is not something
we plan to give any great deal of thought to.
|
