House of Commons Hansard Debates for 14 Mar 2000 (pt 17)

Mr. Grieve: In Committee, we were interested in the lists of expenses that would constitute campaign expenditure, or referendum expenditure, for the purpose of "notching up" to the limits that would be allowable. Certain exclusions are provided, under which expenses do not count in respect of that ceiling. They include

expenses in respect of any property, services or facilities so far as those expenses fall to be met out of public funds . . . remuneration or allowances payable to any member of the permanent staff of the party . . . reasonable expenses incurred in respect of an individual by way of travelling expenses

--enabling the individual to travel around his constituency, or to conduct a referendum campaign. It is noticeable that we have not discussed the expenses that will be incurred by political parties to achieve compliance with the Bill. Amendments Nos. 147 and 148 would exempt

any legal or other professional expenses incurred in respect of, or in connection with, any requirement in this Act.

As I am sure the Minister will accept, there is no doubt that compliance with the Bill will place financial burdens on political parties. If, in the past, parties have relied on auditors--who may not have been qualified--to do the work on a benevolent basis, it is likely that in future they will have to pay for proper auditors and accountants. Election and referendum campaigns will involve administrative burdens, and in the case of the larger parties, that burden is likely to require the recruitment of staff to ensure complete compliance with the legislation. I hope that the Minister considers it reasonable to assume that it would be wrong to ask parties to deduct the amount involved from their campaign expenditure ceiling.

Let me issue a slight caveat in regard to my own proposals. I can envisage the possibility of the running up of legal expenses by a political party or individual defending a prosecution under the Bill, and if conviction were to follow, it might be argued that the exemption should not apply. If the Minister wishes to consider that further, I shall not stand in his way. It must be right, however, for basic, day-to-day administrative expenses that will impose an additional burden on all political parties, especially smaller parties, to be excluded, as we propose in amendments Nos. 147 and 148--which are identical, apart from the fact that amendment No. 148 applies to referendum expenses.

I know that the Minister has tabled amendments, and I welcome them. They take on board what was said in Committee about the need to raise some of the de minimis levels of expenditure to reduce the burden on political parties, and Opposition Members will support them.

Mr. Tipping: Government amendments Nos. 25, 35 and 71 are indeed concerned with increasing de minimis provision in the case of notional services. As the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) said, the issue was discussed in Committee; indeed, he and his hon. Friends pressed the Government to increase the provision, and I am delighted to have been able to respond. Given the consensus that appears to exist, perhaps I can let the matter rest there.

14 Mar 2000 : Column 212

Amendments Nos. 147 and 148 would add to the list of items in schedules 7 and 12 that are not to be regarded as constituting election or referendum expenses in respect of legal or other professional services incurred in connection with compliance with the Bill. When I first looked at the amendments, I thought they were drawn very widely, but I believed that I knew what their purpose was. I must be fair to the hon. Member for Beaconsfield: he gave some examples, and rightly pointed out that the Bill would place extra burdens on all political parties. I think that he--also being fair, as ever--will acknowledge that, throughout the Bill's passage so far, the Government have provided a series of stepping stones, providing for a light touch in respect of smaller parties and more rigorous enforcement in respect of those with larger incomes and expenditure.

The hon. Gentleman will recall that, earlier in the Bill, the Government allow the Electoral Commission to establish a scheme to distribute money to help political parties to prepare for the legislation. He will also recall that the amount is £500,000 for all political parties.

The hon. Gentleman rightly said that there would be teething troubles, and that the Bill would produce extra burdens; but I am not convinced that the burdens on the larger parties--dare I call them the mainstream parties?--will be as great as he suggested. All the major parties already have the benefit of legal advice, and their accounts are already professionally audited.

Next Section

Index

Home Page