| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Evans: Nothing malicious was intended by the amendments. Indeed, I am wounded by the allegation that that was our intent. It certainly was not. We want to ensure that the rolling register is kept as up to date as possible and that we empower the electoral registration officer--no, there is no spending commitment here--to ensure that the register is up to date.
The Minister says that he regrets that people do not conveniently die. I do not think that anybody conveniently dies--I suspect that in most cases they do not have a say in the matter. However, I understand that, after the 1997 election, the registration officers in one London borough that covered two constituencies did a trawl of their registers and removed more than 11,000 names because so many had been left on for so long. That can be a problem.
Mr. Simon Hughes:
One merit of such a system is that it avoids any political controversy resulting from politicians trying to sort out the register themselves. I once submitted a list and made a mistake about a couple of names; people were clearly alive and well when I had passed them off as having disappeared, on the basis of good advice. I paid about a year's political price for having been so bold as to suggest that they would not be voting, given that they were very much alive and wanted to do so. So I would far rather someone else did the job.
Mr. Evans:
I am sure that a number of electors disappear when they see the hon. Gentleman coming towards their door.
We are simply keen to ensure that the register is kept up to date. In addition, if the register is inaccurate and, as happened in one case, it includes thousands of names of people who are not there to vote, the percentage of the turnout at elections will be that much lower. The more accurate the register, the higher the turnout will be. Having said that, I am sure that the other place will consider carefully what has been said today, and I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Mr. Barnes:
I beg to move amendment No. 39, in page 22, line 22, at end insert
Schedule 1 deals with registration and amends the 1983 Act. Paragraph 6 relates to the publication of registers, and provides for the alteration of registers and the
circumstances in which that may occur. It allows for alterations when electoral returning officers have made clerical errors. That will not be allowed after the issuing of nominations.
In the winter edition of its publication Arena, the Association of Electoral Administrators supported the Bill but pointed out a problem:
My amendment is intended to probe the Minister's thinking on this matter. Electoral returning officers themselves have identified a serious problem in the article to which I have referred.
Mr. Mike O'Brien:
I always pay close attention to amendments tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Derbyshire (Mr. Barnes) because I regard him as the father of the rolling register. His persistence has ensured that the Bill will introduce a system of rolling electoral registration.
I appreciate that that system does not go as far as my hon. Friend would wish. However, I hope that he will regard it as a first step on which we can build in due course. His amendment would mean that changes to the register which would be used at an election could be made after the closing date for nominations for that election where the alteration would merely correct a clerical error. I have considerable sympathy with the purpose behind the amendment, but there are problems with the way in which it would achieve that purpose.
In addition, there is a problem of principle. Changes should not be made to the register once the period of an election has begun. That is the current position as regards additions to the register, and the Bill replicates it under the system of rolling registration. Political parties and candidates need certainty about which, and how many, electors they will deal with at any election. The number of electors determines how much can be spent, and canvassing and leafleting will be targeted at known electors. We are reluctant to start to make exceptions to that basic principle.
However, my hon. Friend points out that his concern, and that of those to whom he has referred, is to correct a clerical error. It is difficult to object to allowing the correction of something that has been agreed to be a clerical error. However, it is possible to imagine some difference of view between individuals as to whether an error was merely clerical, or whether it had been made by
the person who was registering or by the officer, and would thus have an effect to which one of the parties in the election would not be able to subscribe.
There is potential for some conflict. However, my hon. Friend suggests that the measure would apply to only a relatively small number of cases and that it would be unlikely to affect the outcome of the vast majority of election campaigns. I shall look at the issue. I am reluctant to move along the lines that he suggests, for the reasons that I have outlined--candidates need certainty. I am, however, prepared to consider whether there might be some way of considering the matter; we might talk to electoral registration officers to find out whether they have concerns as to their inability to deal with a merely clerical error. In the light of those remarks, I invite my hon. Friend to withdraw the amendment.
Mr. Simon Hughes:
We support the proposition and, as the Minister appears to have given a reasonable reply, I hope that, before the Bill finishes its passage through Parliament, there will be a chance to accommodate the concerns that have been expressed. I understand the reservations, but the proposition is a good one if it can be correctly drafted.
Mr. Barnes:
I am pleased that the Minister has offered to examine the matter, especially by discussing it with electoral returning officers. I understand the concerns as to the technical difficulties that may arise in getting the measure right. However, the matter of principle--that the register cannot be altered after nomination day--is not one to which I would generally adhere. Previously, I have tabled amendments to provide for altering the register after that period. The principle should be that the names of those entitled to be on the register at nomination day are the only ones that should be included. I hope that some thought will be given to the principle as well as to the practicalities and technicalities.
However, given the Minister's comments, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Mr. Barnes:
I beg to move amendment No. 40, in page 34, line 48, after first "of", insert--
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 41, in page 34, line 51, at end insert--
Mr. Barnes:
Schedule 4 already contains a provision to enable people in various positions, occupations or services to obtain proxies. However, there is a difficulty for another group of people--students--whom I want to add to the provision. Currently, if students are away, for an indefinite period, from the area in which they are
Mr. Mike O'Brien:
It may save my hon. Friend from trying to persuade me about amendment No. 40, if I point out that I am convinced by his argument, albeit not by the precise wording of the amendment. In due course, I shall seek to include the provision that he and I want--although not in precisely the form of his amendment.
Mr. Barnes:
I am pleased to hear the Minister's response. I shall see how far I can get with amendment No. 41--although I tabled it more as a probing amendment.
', unless it is made as a result of a notice issued pursuant to subsection (1)(e) above'.
"Whilst most of the proposals contained in the Bill will meet with the approval of the Association members, to many it will be felt that new Section 13A(4) does not go far enough. It does not enable the Electoral Registration Officer to correct his/her own clerical error brought to their attention in the period between the last day for submissions for nominations for an election and polling day. It is during this period that most of the omissions and clerical errors are detected."
That happens because that is the period in which most people pay attention to the electoral register. That is when the political parties canvass the electorate. When details are brought to the attention of the public, they may find that the details that they have submitted are not on the register, or not on it correctly. People should have some opportunity to correct errors made by electoral returning officers. I appreciate that that may require some facility for double checking before an election so that everyone is happy with the published details.
5 pm
"his attendance at an educational establishment, or".
'or
(ii) "a journey over land of three miles or more".
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |