---

Affordable Housing (North-West)

3. Dr. John Pugh (Southport) (LD): What figures the Government have collated on the availability of affordable housing in coastal towns in the north-west. [179831]

The Minister for Housing and Planning (Keith Hill): The availability of affordable housing is primarily a matter for local housing authorities, although the Government collate a range of data on housing stock condition, new completions and vacancies at local authority level.

Dr. Pugh: The Minister must recognise that there is a growing crisis in affordable housing in successful resorts such as Southport. That is a problem for first-time buyers, and it is also causes problems for the town's economic expansion. Does he acknowledge that there is now a case for looking closely at regional planning guidance and the housing moratorium?

Keith Hill: There is no moratorium. The hon. Gentleman should bear in mind the fact that over the past 10 years house building in the north-west region has exceeded demand by 50 per cent., so it is reasonable to try to relate new housing development to need. However, new Government funding of nearly £500 million over the next two years will deliver 9,500 homes for rent and sale, as well as improvements to existing houses in the north-west. I am sure that Sefton metropolitan borough council, Southport's local authority, will benefit from that new money for the purposes of affordable housing.

Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley) (Lab): While recognising the needs of Southport and the coastal towns, my right hon. Friend must not forget that nearby towns like Chorley, which are affected in the same way, ought to be part of the same package. Will he consider using the Government-owned land in Chorley for low-cost housing?
 
23 Jun 2004 : Column 1325
 

Keith Hill: I am aware of my hon. Friend's serious concerns about the matter on behalf of his constituents in Chorley, which he has raised in many representations to me. I anticipate that Chorley will benefit from the extra package of funding that I mentioned earlier, and we expect new planning guidance for the north-west region to commence towards the end of this year.

Postal Voting

4. Mrs. Patsy Calton (Cheadle) (LD): What reviews are being undertaken of the experience of the all-postal ballot pilots in the June elections; and if he will make a statement. [179832]

The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. John Prescott): The Electoral Commission is evaluating the pilots and will report in September. The pilots' achievement is, however, already clear. In the four regions holding all-postal ballots, more than twice as many people voted as did in the Euro elections in 1999, an increase of nearly 3   million voters. Turnout in the local elections also increased. As the House knows, the Electoral Commission is reviewing, under the statutory requirements, the results of those four pilots and will report to the House. Unlike the hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Mr. Duncan), who yesterday told the House that he did not care what the Electoral Commission thought, I am sure the rest of us in the House welcome the opportunity to study the commission's findings. Finally, I am sure the House will want to congratulate all the returning officers, their staff and the Royal Mail on rising to the challenge.

Mrs. Calton: Will the Deputy Prime Minister acknowledge that there is a tension between increasing the turnout, which we all welcome, and forcing people to vote by a method that they did not choose? Many constituents in Cheadle have indicated to me that they are unhappy about being forced to vote by post, and that they wish to be able to engage in voting at the local polling station, which gave them a sense of civic occasion that is lacking from filling in a form at home.

The Deputy Prime Minister: The turnout in the hon. Lady's constituency increased. In 1999 the turnout for the Euro election was 26 per cent. In 2004, in the last elections, it was 43 per cent.—a 65 per cent. increase. Whatever the tensions to which she refers, I do not believe for a moment that people were forced to vote in that manner. They turned out in their extra hundreds of thousands to vote. That was the purpose of the exercise and we achieved it.

Helen Jackson (Sheffield, Hillsborough) (Lab): Will my right hon. Friend take it from me that in Sheffield the postal voting pilot was extremely well managed, and was received universally throughout the city? We had a 100 per cent. increase in turnout compared with the last local elections. For many younger people, that will have been the first time that they had ever seen a ballot paper, and they used it. The one thing that my right hon. Friend might consider is making one or two local positions available for people to put their ballot papers on polling day. Apart from that, the system worked beautifully smoothly.
 
23 Jun 2004 : Column 1326
 

The Deputy Prime Minister: My hon. Friend rightly points out that there was a successful turnout. When the Electoral Commission recommended all-postal pilots, all parties in the House agreed. Nobody disagreed; everybody voted for the principle. More people participated in the elections than before—a very considerable increase. We are actively considering my hon. Friend's recommendation, but we should wait for the report from the Electoral Commission, which is reviewing the process and will report in September. I am sure that the House will give serious consideration to its recommendations, and not do as the hon. Member for Rutland and Melton did yesterday, when he said:

"I do not care what the Electoral Commission said."—[Official Report, 22 June 2004; Vol. 422, c. 1208.]

Mr. Edward Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD): The Deputy Prime Minister knows that the all-postal ballots were extremely expensive for council tax payers, not least because of the cost of specialised printing, the huge amounts of overtime, and postage. What estimate has he made of the extra cost of the experiment to council tax payers, and how much would have been saved if he had listened to the advice of the Electoral Commission?

The Deputy Prime Minister: The hon. Gentleman's point about expense surprises me, because pilot experiments have occurred since 2000, and he did not complain about expense in the four years in which more than 200 all-postal voting experiments occurred. It would be a lot cheaper if people did not vote, but if that is the Liberal position, I disagree with it.

Mrs. Ann Cryer (Keighley) (Lab): Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of the problems in the Bradford district emanated from registration rather than from the all-out postal ballot? Is he prepared to chat with my hon. Friends the Members for Bradford, North (Mr. Rooney) and for Bradford, West (Mr. Singh) and me about the problems, as we perceive them, in the Bradford district?

The Deputy Prime Minister: I understand my hon. Friend's point, and she has made a number of public statements about the matter. However, I recommend that she talks to the Electoral Commission, which is reviewing the circumstances. I am always open to discussing hon. Members' fears, but the Electoral Commission, which will issue a report that the House will debate, will best address my hon. Friend's concerns.

Mr. George Osborne (Tatton) (Con): Will the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that this autumn's regional referendums will be postponed if the Electoral Commission identifies problems with the all-postal ballot?

The Deputy Prime Minister: The orders relating to the referendums will be laid before the House very shortly, and the referendums will take place. I shall reaffirm what we said last night: if the Electoral Commission makes it clear in its report that it believes the ballots to be unsafe, we will reconsider the voting process, but until we receive that report we will proceed with the orders. We
 
23 Jun 2004 : Column 1327
 
intend to hold the referendums and give people in the north the chance to decide whether they want their own assembly.

Mr. Clive Soley (Ealing, Acton and Shepherd's Bush) (Lab): Will my right hon. Friend tell me the number of letters of apology that he has received from editors and journalists who told us that the election would be chaotic and that it would involve court cases? Is it the same old story of all the news that is fit to print, or has he received, as he ought to have done, letters of apology?

The Deputy Prime Minister: The press whipped up the atmosphere, often with little evidence, and I have asked the editors whether they have sent evidence to either the police or the Electoral Commission. My hon. Friend will wait a long time to get apologies out of the British press.

Mrs. Caroline Spelman (Meriden) (Con): Will the Deputy Prime Minister accept that yesterday's concession by the Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, the hon. Member for Shipley (Mr. Leslie), which The Times has portrayed as something that may wreck the regional polls, is surely proof that, while he doggedly pursues the route to regionalisation, Government Front Benchers are increasingly looking for the exit signs?

The Deputy Prime Minister: That is nonsense. A report in The Times does not guarantee that a story is true. [Interruption.] There are many examples of The Times getting something wrong and not apologising. When The Times first raised its concerns about electoral offences, it committed an electoral offence itself by reporting an estimate from the exit polls. The hon. Lady should not necessarily believe what she reads in The Times—that statement is unfortunate, but it happens to be true. As in the cases of Scotland, Wales and London, the Government are united on giving people in the northern areas of this country a chance to say whether they want an elected assembly, and I hope that they vote for that. I assume that the Opposition will change their position, as they have done on every other occasion. To begin with, they oppose regional assemblies, but they accept them when people say that they want them.

---