| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst): This is an exciting moment for those of us who are new to the Bill and have been unable to participate in the proceedings hitherto. The debate gives us an opportunity to turn our attention--in, I hope, a focused way--to the Bill's comprehensive and complex provisions. I am pleased about that, and about the fact that the selection list gives us ample opportunity to probe, examine and analyse the Bill.
Clause 1 gives us an opportunity to put our discussion in context. On first reading the clause, I thought that it was relatively straightforward. It is a standard clause, which we have come to expect in the sort of measure that we are considering; especially its provision for the commission to consist of electoral commissioners, who should number
"not less than five, but not more than nine".
However, I began to worry about that when I read on--as I hope you, Sir Alan, agree one has to in this context--to the commission's general functions and the proposed number of members.
4.30 pm
Very much in my mind was the thought that to discharge its functions adequately the commission may have to appoint sub-committees of its members to give proper attention to the various responsibilities given to it by the Bill. I ranged quickly over the general functions, such as preparing and publishing a report after each election and referendum. It must also
There is another catch-all responsibility in clause 8:
Mr. David Maclean (Penrith and The Border):
Before my right hon. Friend completes his general introduction to clause stand part--
Mr. Maclean:
Indeed. Before my right hon. Friend completes his introductory remarks, I remind him that he has not mentioned the fact that the Bill applies to the whole United Kingdom. The nine commissioners--at most--will have to deal with four separate legislative systems as the Government continue their policy of disintegrating the United Kingdom. How can nine commissioners possibly deal with the Northern Ireland legislative system, Scotland, the Welsh Assembly and what remains of the United Kingdom Parliament?
Mr. Forth:
I am grateful to my right hon. Friend, because he has reinforced the difficulty in which I find myself on being asked whether the clause should stand part of the Bill. In normal circumstances, I confess, I would argue for the membership to be at the lower end of the numbers so as to establish a compact body capable of making good decisions, but quickly. On this occasion, my worry is the reverse, and I wonder whether nine is sufficient.
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right to draw the Committee's attention to the fact that the commission would face a bewildering array of electoral arrangements--not only our traditional and excellent first-past-the-post system, but a number of different proportional systems will have to be considered; and what may seem, on the face of it, to be the routine responsibility in clause 4(1) to
I hope that the Committee and the Government do not accept that we have had the last word on whether the proportional systems that have been introduced up and down the United Kingdom are the final versions. The commission may recommend that we return to the first-past-the-post system, and I hope that it will. Even in that seductively simple provision in clause 4 we already see that the commission might have an extremely complex and demanding series of responsibilities, and clause 5 refers to the
At that point the question arises whether nine commissioners could remotely be sufficient. One could have in one's mind's eye a sub-committee of even three or four members setting out to fulfil the responsibilities put on the commission under any of the clauses that I have mentioned--clause 4, clause 5, which has a number of different requirements, the consultations under clause 6, or the giving of advice under clause 8. Some matters will be continuous, whereas others will be ad hoc and refer to specific events.
Mr. Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove):
The right hon. Gentleman has gone through a number of clauses. Has he directed his attention to clause 13, which enables the electoral commissioners to appoint deputy electoral commissioners?
Mr. Forth:
Indeed, I had cast my eye over clause 13. The hon. Gentleman may think that he is solving the problem that I have set out, except that it says in clause 13(3):
We have this peculiar mix of a continuity of responsibility, purpose and process, and the specifics that will arise from each election and referendum, to which the commission will have to turn its attention.
At this early stage in the proceedings of the Committee on the Floor of the House, I am beginning to wonder how much thought has been given to this matter. I cannot judge that in detail at this early stage--although the opportunity will arise over the following hours to do so. One has to merely glance at clause 1 and out come tumbling all these questions about whether this proposal has any chance of working properly. As it is fundamental to our constitutional and electoral provisions, surely the Government should have given it more thought than they obviously have done.
The Minister may think that nine commissioners will be able adequately to discharge the responsibilities that the Bill gives them, but I shall take an awful lot of persuading. The Minister will have time to do his persuading at the end of this part of the debate, but he will have to be pretty good to convince me that nine electoral commissioners can do justice to the enormous responsibilities that will be laid on the commission under clause 1 and the following clauses in this part of the Bill.
I confess that a Bill which I hoped would have general agreement and would be relatively straightforward seems already to be in trouble on clause 1. The Committee has its work cut out to examine these provisions properly and to come to proper conclusions. I say that as a preliminary observation, Sir Alan. You would not want me to go further at this stage. We shall mercifully be able to examine many of these matters in detail.
I am uneasy about this process. I am not satisfied that the Government have given this legislation proper consideration. I am grateful to my right hon. and hon. Friends whose amendments have been selected, because that will enable us to scrutinise this matter thoroughly. It may be that the Bill should not be rushed on to the statute book in its present state, because if it were, the Committee and the House might be making a serious mistake. I hope that we shall do our job properly and seriously and with due diligence.
Mr. Stunell:
In view of the remarks that have been made, I just wanted to put on record the view of the Liberal Democrats that the Bill is overdue, and that the material it contains is broadly and properly in line with the Neill committee recommendations.
"keep under review, and from time to time submit reports to the Secretary of State on . . . such matters"--
that is a very general remit--
"relating to elections . . . such matters relating to referendums . . . the redistribution of seats at parliamentary elections".
That in itself is an enormous responsibility, but as we know, the block transfer of the boundary commissions' responsibilities to the new commission will take place later and we find that it is to be consulted on changes to electoral law.
"The Commission may, at the request of any relevant body, provide the body with advice and assistance as respects any matter in which the Commission have skill and experience",
which, of course, we assume will be very wide indeed. However, I shall not go into detail at this stage. This is simply a broad review.
"prepare and publish . . . a report on the administration of the election or referendum",
which would appear to be a standard process in normal historical circumstances, will take on an altogether new character. The different systems of proportional representation in the different parts of the United Kingdom are in their early stages and it is possible--I think it is a certainty--that the reports that we would expect from the commission on those matters would have to be much more detailed and much more considered than might otherwise be the case.
"redistribution of seats at parliamentary elections".
We are beginning to see the real possibility of the "not more than nine" electoral commissioners having to cover an awful lot of ground. To do so, they may have to constitute themselves into a series of working committees or sub-committees--hon. Members may call them what they will.
"The functions of a Deputy Electoral Commissioner are limited to serving as a member of any Boundary Committee to which he is appointed."
I do not think that the deputy electoral commissioners will solve the problem. I concede that they will solve part of the problem. They may take the burden of the responsibilities of the hitherto boundary commission--now boundary committee--but that still leaves all the others. I accept that the hon. Gentleman intervened in a spirit of helpfulness, but he has solved only a small part of the problem.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |