| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. George Howarth: As the hon. Gentleman rightly says, the clause is designed to make it easier for people who are remanded in custody to register as electors. Remand prisoners currently have the right to vote--although some of the press reporting would have us believe otherwise--but they are often disfranchised in practice because they cannot register in respect of their home address while they are detained elsewhere.
The clause provides that people on remand may be registered as if they were resident at their previous address or may register in respect of the institution where they are held. The basic principle is that remand prisoners are by definition unconvicted, and although it is right and appropriate that those who are convicted and serving a prison sentence should be deprived of the right to vote as part of their punishment, that should not be the case for those who have not been proved to have committed an offence.
Mr. Fabricant:
I understand the Minister's argument, and the argument advanced by both the Government and the Opposition that convicted criminals should not have the vote, but I wonder what his view is on the recent conclusion of the South African and Canadian Governments that the disenfranchisement of convicted criminals is unconstitutional on human rights grounds. Has he given any consideration to what view the European Court of Human Rights may have, given the statement that was made earlier today regarding the armed forces?
Mr. Howarth:
If the hon. Gentleman consults the front of the Bill, he will find that, as with all legislation, there is a declaration by the Secretary of State that its provisions are consistent with the European convention on human rights. In those circumstances, I am sure that he will accept that the matter has been deliberated on and considered appropriately and would not be in the Bill if there were any problems with it. He will forgive me if I do not stray into speculating on what arguments may have taken place in other parts of the world. I am simply not familiar enough with the debates that took place there.
It has suddenly occurred to me that the disenfranchisement of prisoners is consistent with the jurisprudence of the convention. I am sure that that is the answer that the hon. Gentleman would have expected from me. With that assurance, I am sure that he will support the clause, which I commend to the Committee.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley):
I beg to move amendment No. 13, in page 8, line 23, at end insert
The Chairman of Ways and Means (Sir Alan Haselhurst):
With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 113, in page 8, line 23, at end insert
Mr. Evans:
I hope that the consensus that we witnessed on clauses 4 and 5 will also be evidenced on clause 6.
One of the more depressing aspects of the Bill is the admission that there is in our society a small group of people who for various reasons are denied what most of us would regard as a basic necessity of life in a civilised society: a roof over their heads. I appreciate the fact that the term "homeless" is divided between rough sleepers and those who are between homes, perhaps in temporary hostel accommodation or living with relatives while awaiting rehousing, but I am concerned with those in the first category.
The Bill brings the situation into the 21st century and admits the fact that we have a group of people in our society who are genuinely homeless. The position varies in different parts of the country. The Minister will know of the problems in his constituency, as I know of those in mine. I have the good fortune to represent a rural constituency, and when I asked one of the local government officers there today what impact she thought the Bill would have when it was enacted, she said that she thought it would have none whatever, because nobody in Ribble Valley was sleeping rough and therefore unable to be on the register.
I spoke to the returning officer in Ceredigion today and he, too, said that there was very little problem there, but we know that in urban areas there are enormous problems. Many of us walk up Victoria street at night on the way home. It is one of the most depressing journeys that we can make. The problem has existed for many years, so I will not try to apportion blame. In the shop doorways there are people sleeping rough, with blankets over them, in a sleeping bag or, even more depressingly, with nothing more than a cardboard box.
Near McDonald's and the Army and Navy store in Victoria street, there are at least 20 individuals sleeping rough--I walk past them every evening on the way back to my flat. Shelter estimates that between 1,500 and 2,000 people sleep rough, but no one can say with certainty how many do so. It is a dreadful shame that those people are denied the opportunity to vote that is given to everyone else. They suffer the indignity of living how they do and they should not suffer the further indignity of not being allowed to participate in the democratic process. Indeed, some people may argue that the homeless should have more of a say in what happens because of the conditions in which they live.
We approach this issue with a determination equal to that of the Government. People should not be excluded from voting, but we wish to ensure that that is achieved as sensibly as possible. Our concerns were raised by Paul Gribble, who was the Conservative nominee on the working group, which said of the definition of locality:
Amendment No. 13 would require some documentary evidence of a person's link to a locality, such as a valid passport or UK driving licence. We appreciate that production of such items may not always be possible so we have also included other items, such as:
"and shall be accompanied by at least one item of documentary evidence of the type referred to in subsection (3A) below demonstrating that the declarant is a living person and at least one item of documentary evidence of the type referred to in subsection (3A) below demonstrating that the declarant has resided at the required address, provided that this requirement shall be satisfied by the production of a single item of documentary evidence only, if that item demonstrates both that the declarant is a living person and that he has resided at the required address.
(3A) The items of documentary evidence required for the purposes of subsection (3) shall be any of
(a) a valid United Kingdom passport;
(b) a valid United Kingdom driving licence;
(c) a printed statement from a bank or building society authorised to do business in the United Kingdom and which is dated not more than 28 days before the date of the declaration;
(d) a copy of any of the foregoing certified by a commissioner for oaths;
(e) a letter from an officer of a registered charity active within the parliamentary constituency and which is dated not more than 28 days before the date of the declaration certifying that the declarant is a living person and has resided at the required address;
(f) a letter from the principal officer of a hostel for homeless persons within the parliamentary constituency and which is dated not more than 28 days before the date of the declaration certifying that the declarant is a living person and has resided at the required address,
or such other document as may in the reasonable opinion of the registration officer concerned constitute sufficient evidence of the matters referred to in subsection (3).
(3B) If a person makes a declaration of local connection supported by items of documentary evidence referred to in subsection (3A) and one or more items of that documentary evidence are false, he is guilty of an offence.
(3C) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (3B) is liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding Level 5 on the Standard Scale.
(3D) The declaration of any person convicted of an offence under subsection (3B) of this section shall be rendered void upon his conviction.".
"and shall be accompanied by at least one item of documentary evidence of the type referred to in subsection (3A) below demonstrating that the declarant is a living person and at least one item of documentary evidence of the type referred to in subsection (3A) below demonstrating that the declarant has resided at the required address, provided that this requirement shall be satisfied by the production of a single item of documentary evidence only, if that item demonstrates both that the declarant is a living person and that he has resided at the required address.
(3A) The items of documentary evidence required for the purposes of subsection (3) shall be any of--
(a) a valid United Kingdom passport;
(b) a valid United Kingdom driving licence;
(c) a current passport issued by the Government of a member state of the European Community;
(d) a current book for the payment of allowances, benefits or pensions issued by a United Kingdom Government department;
(e) a medical card issued by the Northern Ireland Central Services Agency or the Great Britain equivalent;
(f) a card made of plastic issued by the Department of Health and Social Security with a name and national insurance number embossed on it;
(g) in the case of a woman married within two years prior to polling day, a certified copy of extract of any entry of marriage issued by the Register General in the United Kingdom;
(h) an United Kingdom identity card bearing a recent photograph of the elector;
(i) a printed statement from a bank or building society authorised to do business in the United Kingdom and which is dated not more than 28 days before the date of declaration;
(j) a copy of any of the foregoing certified by a commissioner for oaths;
(k) a letter from an officer of a registered charity active within the parliamentary constituency and which is dated not more than 28 days before the date of the declaration certifying that the declarant is a living person and has resided at the required address;
(l) a letter from the principal officer of a hostel for homeless persons within the parliamentary constituency and which is dated not more than 28 days before the date of the declaration certifying that the declarant is a living person and has resided at the required address, or such other document as may in the reasonable opinion of the registration officer concerned constitute sufficient evidence of the matters referred to in subsection (3).
(3B) If a person makes a declaration of local connection supported by items of documentary evidence referred to in subsection (3A) and one or more items of that documentary evidence are false, he is guilty of an offence.
(3C) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (3B) is liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding Level 5 on the Standard Scale.
(3D) The declaration of any person convicted of an offence under subsection (3B) of this section shall be rendered void upon his conviction.".
"We recognise that this could be thought to open the system to abuse if a candidate or political party sought to use such declarations to falsely register supporters in the electoral area immediately before an election."
12 Jan 2000 : Column 346
In a letter to the shadow Home Secretary dated 20 September 1999, the Home Secretary said about the possibility of fraud:
He added:
"I think that it is important to recognise that the declaration of locality route would be a last resort. The homeless would be encouraged to register wherever possible in respect of an address with which they could establish a link, such as a hostel or day centre which they used regularly."
"I do not believe that Mr. Gribble's fears are well grounded; but I would of course be happy to discuss this point further to see whether we could modify the proposal in some way so as to meet your party's concerns."
That is what we are trying to do this evening and in that spirit we have tabled amendment No. 13, which is similar to amendment No. 113.
"a letter from the principal officer of a hostel for homeless persons within the parliamentary constituency and which is dated not more than 28 days before the date of the declaration certifying that the declarant is a living person and has resided at the required address".
We have made six suggestions and I am sure that the Minister and his officials have considered other forms of documentary proof that would not block people's right to vote but would also ensure that the right is not abused.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |