| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. David Trimble (Upper Bann) (UUP):
I start by commending what was done by the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives in terms of their approach to the
24 Feb 2005 : Column 512
Bill, which has resulted in the Bill before us being somewhat different from the Bill that we might have had originally. I will come back to that, because there are some really important points there.
As has been said, we are operating in a context created by the electoral reform legislation. We regard that legislation as hugely important. There is no doubt but that Northern Ireland elections over the years have been attended by certain local customs, although I have to say that those customs are not unique to Northern Ireland. The extent of electoral abuse that existed in the past in Northern Ireland exists in some localities in Great Britain today, and indeed will be hugely increased by some of the Government's other proposals.
The Minister may be aware of the very considerable concern about recent elections and referendums that exists in some areas in England, where there is increasing evidence of massive abuse through the novel practices that the Government have been introducing. That is not a matter for debate today, but it is so closely connected with this matter that the Government need to think. They have been doing—I hope that they continue to do—the right thing in Northern Ireland, but they are not doing the right thing, in electoral terms, elsewhere. I hope that the practices that operate with regard to Northern Ireland elections are replicated elsewhere in the United Kingdom to deal with the abuse that exists there.
I return to my central point that there were local customs in Northern Ireland, of which at one point, I suppose, there was a grudging acceptance in society. Indeed, in many respects, the practice of what was called personation operated as a sort of informal proxy voting—I may come back to this later. People sometimes took advantage of it. However, in recent years, because of the way in which it has been organised by certain paramilitary-related parties and because of the intimidation that accompanied their actions, there was very real concern that the abuse was getting out of hand in some respects and was becoming something completely one-sided. That had been a concern of ours for a long time. As the Minister knows, we have been pressing for reform on this matter and we were glad to see reform come in the shape of the electoral reform legislation. We think that it is hugely important.
The report quoted by the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) expressed the opinion that the November 2003 election was probably the most honest that there had been in Northern Ireland. We share that view, and we are glad of that. We want to see elections that are honest and that have the greatest participation possible, which is why we approach the Bill with a slightly mixed mind. We are concerned that it might weaken the structure of the electoral reform legislation, but at the same time, we do not object in principle to putting people on the register. Indeed, we want to see people go on the register—but they must be people who are entitled to be there.
That brings me to the point that I touched on earlier in an intervention, which is that although we expected there to be a significant drop when the electoral reform legislation took effect, we thought that it would be a one-off. The continuing drop is a matter for concern. As a number of hon. Members said, it is something that ought to be looked into closely. Some work has already been done, but as was suggested in an intervention, it
24 Feb 2005 : Column 513
would be a very good idea for more to be done, and in particular, for an effort to be made to identify the 80,000-plus persons whose registration is about to be resumed, and to establish whether we can find out anything about their circumstances.
The Minister referred to some of the reasons why people may allow their names to lapse, or not put themselves on the register, but hon. Members have also touched on three matters already in their interventions. The hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Mr. Donaldson) referred to the fact—it is a fact—that many people associated with the security forces do not put their names on the register because they feel that by being on the register, they are making it easier for people to target them. That has been a factor. I do not think that it would be an increased factor at the moment. If anything, it might be a diminished factor, although, in the present uncertainty, who knows? But it certainly has been a factor in the past.
My hon. Friend the Member for North Down (Lady Hermon) referred to a significant factor when she spoke of the quality of the work done by the Electoral Commission, and whether enough was being done to draw people's attention to this fact, particularly with regard to old people. Again, I do not want to stray beyond the terms of the Bill, but we have grave concerns about the quality of the Electoral Commission's work, even on something as basic as why counts in Northern Ireland take so much longer than counts elsewhere. We all have to experience that irritation in Northern Ireland. I dare say that if there is something other than a local government election on 5 May, by the time the first results come out in Northern Ireland, everyone else in Great Britain will have gone home.
Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock) (Lab): You may hold the balance of power.
Mr. Trimble: There was a happy occasion when that happened. It caused some confusion on the mainland in February 1973—[Hon. Members: "1974."] I stand corrected. I am grateful to the hon. Members for Belfast, North (Mr. Dodds) and for East Londonderry (Mr. Campbell) for assisting me.
Mr. Trimble: But never so felicitous.
Slow counts are one of the many factors that concern us about the work of the Electoral Commission. The Bill deals with the creation of the register and the maintenance of an accurate register. I do not want to be too negative about the Electoral Commission, but the Minister should see whether there are ways to improve the quality of its work, because that is undoubtedly a factor.
My hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, South (Rev. Martin Smyth) made a good point that may explain the low take-up of registration by young people. Previous research mentioned that fact, but did not explain it, other than assuming that young people are more apathetic than others.
Andrew Mackinlay:
Surely one of the great problems is the number of students from Northern Ireland who
24 Feb 2005 : Column 514
are studying at university on the United Kingdom mainland who either were not on the original register or are now in their second or third year. Those who are diligent and deem themselves residents of Northern Ireland could be treated unfairly, but there is also the potential for abuse if they are not retuning as frequently to Northern Ireland as they once did. The problem is the grey area of what constitutes a "resident" in respect of Northern Ireland students who are on the mainland.
Mr. Trimble: The hon. Gentleman makes the valid point that the problem of young people registering may be affected by the large number of people from Northern Ireland who attend university in Great Britain. However, I wonder whether that proportion is any higher than the proportion of people from an English region who are attending universities out of their region, perhaps 50, 100 or 200 miles away. The proportion of Northern Irish students on the mainland may be no higher. The existence of a bit of water does not affect ease of travel.
Andrew Mackinlay: This is an important point. There is a cultural difference. People from the mainland are encouraged by the National Union of Students and their families to register, and it is not considered irregular to be registered both at university in, say, Durham, and at home in Surrey. However, I can understand the diligent and responsible citizen of Northern Ireland hesitating, almost nervously, in case he is doing something improper by registering in both places. It is the decent people who will be nervous, because the Electoral Commission has not spelt out with clarity the ground rules in Northern Ireland.
Mr. Trimble: Again, the hon. Gentleman makes a good point, which I would take further. The cultural difference is largely the result of people finding themselves operating in a different political environment when they move from Northern Ireland to GB. Why is that so? No doubt the hon. Gentleman knows that it is because of the failure of the national political parties to be national parties. The fault lies to a large extent with the people who are not in the Chamber; I think we can cheerfully agree on that.
The serious point is that people who have moved from, for example, Surrey to attend Edinburgh university will be approached by those who are involved in political activity to ask them whether they want to register in Edinburgh or to participate in the election at home. People from Northern Ireland might not be approached and targeted in the same way because they are likely to cast their votes at home, to which those involved in politics in Edinburgh or wherever are not motivated to have regard. The problem is underlined by an important fact that is of a more general nature. Again, I do not want to stray too far from the point, but there are political implications for the so-called national parties.
My hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, South mentioned timing. The months of August and September are not a good time for people to fill in the forms. That is true not only because young people are going to university, but because of the normal tempo and shape of family life. That should be taken on board.
24 Feb 2005 : Column 515
We need to look at the causes. Until we know what they are and find a way to address them, we cannot be sure that the problem will not continue. The one-off drop in registrations when the 2002 Act came into force was followed by a continuing drop, in response to which the Minister has proposed a Bill that is almost of a one-off character. It will operate for 12 months, but if we do not address the underlying problem satisfactorily, then what? Once the Bill ceases to have effect and people are no longer restored or carried forward in the way provided for in the Bill, will the Minister or his successor introduce another one-off measure in three or four years' time? If that happens, will we not permanently change the scheme of electoral reform, and does that not put us in danger of undermining legislation? That is one of the crucial problems with the Bill.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |