Select Committee on Constitutional Affairs and ODPM: Housing, Planning, Local Government and Regions Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 360-366)

7 FEBRUARY 2005

MR NICK RAYNSFORD MP, MR CHRISTOPHER LESLIE MP AND MR PAUL ROWSELL

Q360 Dr Whitehead: You appear to be saying that you are fairly confident, in fact, that in reality the potential issue of the marked register has not been taken up. Presumably as a result of the wide publicity that this Committee will receive that may now change.

  Mr Leslie: I hope it does not. Our policy so far has been to give it to those persons authorised to see the full register.

  Mr Raynsford: It is not the case that people who are authorised to see it have then got complete freedom to use that information for any purpose that they want, there are tight restrictions on the use of that data too. It is a lacuna, unquestionably, but less of one than is perhaps implied sometimes.

Q361 Chris Mole: Those of us on the Select Committee who went to talk to the Electoral Commission in Australia were impressed with its robustness and independence and everything. Do you think our Electoral Commission is fulfilling its function of keeping everything under review that it is charged to do?

  Mr Leslie: Yes. The Electoral Commission does its job well. It does not always agree with Government and Government does not always agree with the Electoral Commission, but they make their recommendations independent of the Executive, they account to Parliament directly, and certainly I feel as though we get a good service from the Electoral Commission. Certainly Nick has a different experience of some of the local government aspects.

  Mr Raynsford: Could I just add that, along with Alan Beith, I am a member of the Speaker's Committee which does oversee the Electoral Commission and I think one would inevitably say that as an organisation that has been in existence for a relatively short period of time it has been on a steep learning curve and has made very considerable progress in many areas. There are other areas where we probably see scope for continued and further improvements.

Q362 Chairman: It has not passed all its exams?

  Mr Raynsford: I do not think I should say anything more than that at this stage.

Q363 Chris Mole: Just now you said that Government is not always going to agree with everything the Commission says. Do you see their recommendations more as academic studies rather than practical blueprints?

  Mr Leslie: Sometimes they are very detailed blueprints and policy suggestions but, ultimately, because of the nature of our constitution, Government makes decisions and is held to account in Parliament for those decisions. That is the nature of our democracy. If we were to abrogate our responsibility to make decisions then you could potentially argue that it was reducing democratic accountability for those decisions and that is why I think it is right that the Electoral Commission advises and Government decides and is accountable in Parliament for those decisions.

Q364 Chris Mole: So you are not looking to change the composition, perhaps put more practitioners on there or shift its focus slightly?

  Mr Leslie: Certainly I think that the Speaker's Commission will look at a number of different issues and they have got their own investigation into some of these questions. I think we should keep flexible the evolution of the Electoral Commission. It does very good work at present and we want to make sure that it remains a relevant, modern organisation able to give the best advice and to get the best information from those it works with in partnership.

  Mr Raynsford: Let me just add one point here. There is an obvious tension between a desire to ensure that the body can act in a robust and independent way as against a position where there is no political input from people who are practitioners with an understanding of the political process into the work of the organisation. It may well be that in wishing to ensure the principle of independence is upheld, and therefore there was no possibility of anyone with a practical involvement in politics over the previous 10 years serving as a Commissioner, that the balance may be drawn a little too tightly against an understanding of day-to-day practical issues. Certainly from my discussions with Sam Younger, I think the Commission itself would welcome possible changes, not necessarily to the composition of the Commission itself but to the working arrangements to ensure that there can be a more practical engagement with those people who are experienced in the political operation.

Q365 Chairman: Does that need legislation?

  Mr Raynsford: If it was a change to the actual composition of the Commission it would. If it was an administrative arrangement whereby the Commission had contact with a body of senior practitioners from all parties who could advise it then that can be done without the need for legislation.

Q366 Chris Mole: They seem to be calling for more powers in Voting for Change, their report on the electoral modernisation programme, things like setting data standards for electronic databases, managing individual registration. Do you think a centralised electoral body in the UK is the right way to go in due course?

  Mr Leslie: Our response to Voting for Change is on the record and is in detail and I would not propose to run through our response to each of their recommendations. There may well be circumstances where simply by virtue that they are an organisation capable of undertaking certain functions, for instance the administration of referendums we know passed to their responsibility in that administrative sense, and there might be tasks they can take on in a more hands-on way. It would be imprudent of us not to recognise that as an organisation they may be capable of doing that but I think the balance of responsibilities is pretty fair as a split between the Electoral Commission and Government at present.

  Mr Raynsford: Let me add one specific illustration. We were talking earlier about the CORE project and the second phase of that project which will be looking at the framework for national access to the register. That could be achieved by one of a number of options, of which the two most likely appear to be either a search engine operated from one central location or the register itself being held by one particular body. It seems difficult to imagine a body other than the Electoral Commission which will be correctly in place to fulfil either of those functions. Yes, there is an obvious logic to the Electoral Commission playing a central role as we develop a number of these projects, that would not necessarily be at all out of keeping with the current definition of its responsibilities.

  Chairman: On that note, can I thank you very much for your evidence. Thank you.





 
previous page contents

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 4 April 2005