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.
|