The
Chairman: Order. Mr. Donaldson, that is not in
the legislation before
us.
Mr.
Donaldson: I understand that, Mr. Martlew, but
I am laying down a marker and we hope that the Government will
look—
The
Chairman: Order. The Minister has heard what the hon.
Gentleman
said.
Mr.
Donaldson: I hope that the Government will look carefully
at the matter and, in the context of what they have already done for
the Northern Ireland Assembly, consider what they might do in relation
to the European
Parliament. I
place on record my party’s appreciation of the work of the
Electoral Office for Northern Ireland, the chief electoral officer and
the progress that we have made. Northern Ireland once had a reputation
for having elections that were deemed, let us say, less than wholesome
in terms of the integrity of the electoral process. The old saying,
“Vote early and vote often”, was a catchphrase associated
with elections in Northern Ireland. We have come a long way from the
days when—dare I say it—even the deceased managed to cast
a vote in elections in some constituencies.
We now have
an electoral process that draws the attention of many people across the
democratic world. Delegations come from Commonwealth countries to look
at the electoral process and consider the work that has been done.
Through the Minister, I say both to his officials who do such work and
to the Electoral Office for Northern Ireland that we appreciate it. I
have seen the merits in the changes that have taken place, and the
benefits that they have brought to an electoral process that now has a
greater degree of integrity. Such changes have resulted in electoral
outcomes that are far more reflective of the will of the people than
was the case in the past. The changes proposed in the regulations will
enhance the process for European elections and we welcome
that. 4.58
pm
Paul
Goggins: I am grateful to the hon. Member for Tewkesbury
for his support. As always, he cuts to the chase and if there is common
agreement, he says so. I appreciate
that. I
would have offered a lengthy explanation why the issue of filling
vacancies in European elections might be rather different from the
matter we mentioned in our other exchange, but the right hon. Member
for Lagan Valley talked eloquently about that—even though the
Chairman remonstrated with him for doing so. The matter will, of
course, be dealt with in the context of the Political Parties and
Elections Bill. However, if there was a straight by-election as a
result of somebody resigning or, sadly, dying, it could result in the
scenario that the right hon. Gentleman outlined. I am sure that point
will be borne in mind in those debates, which will take place well away
from this
Committee. The
hon. Member for Tewkesbury asked about home addresses. The amendment to
which he referred relates to the Political Parties and Elections Bill.
It applies only to parliamentary elections and therefore would not
apply to the European elections. In any event, the Bill is
still passing through this place, although obviously as things develop,
we reflect on them to see whether they are relevant to other
elections. On the
proposal to suspend the count at 11 o’clock unless there is
agreement that it should carry on, the only scenario I can foresee in
which everybody would agree that it should carry on would be if the
count could be concluded in a very short time. Rather than everybody
going away and being summoned back the next day, it would be concluded
quickly. However, the working assumption is that the count would
conclude at 11 o’clock and reconvene the next day, thereby
safeguarding the welfare of the staff involved. The regulations place
beyond doubt that that is what should happen unless there is a narrow
window in which the work could be
completed. The
hon. Gentleman said that he was slightly cautious about subscribers. We
are merely bringing the rules in line with those for the rest of the
United Kingdom. We rely on the £5,000 deposit as a deterrent to
those who might seek to be frivolous. We think that the system works,
and the Electoral Commission agrees with our
analysis. The
hon. Member for Argyll and Bute made a fair point, which is that
legislation relating to elections should be made in a timely way, and
in an ideal world we would have introduced the regulations before now.
He quoted extensively from the experience in Scotland. I merely
emphasise that the matters we are considering are not controversial and
have been consulted on extensively. In fact, we have introduced only
those proposals with which everyone was content. Many of the changes
are minor, and some are already in statute for other
elections. I
accept that, ideally, such changes would be introduced slightly earlier
than this, but I do not foresee the kind of controversial developments
that the hon. Gentleman outlined in respect of Scotland, because the
regulations are uncontroversial, minor and much consulted on. None the
less, he has had the opportunity to make his point, and he made it loud
and
clear. To
reinforce a point that the hon. Gentleman made, it is true that
electoral law for Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and, indeed, the
whole of the United Kingdom is not devolved and will therefore always
be a matter for this House. We acknowledge that in attempting to make
legislation as tidy and consolidated as possible, there will always be
differences. For example, for European elections, the single
transferable vote system applies in Northern Ireland, whereas
in England a list system —a different proportional
representation system—applies. That has consequences for how the
legislation is drawn
up. To
make a point about how complicated the regulations are, the hon.
Gentleman asked two specific questions about pages 21 and 49. On the
first point, which was about the official mark, the regulations say
that the interval before it is used again should be
“not less than
five
years”. That
puts Northern Ireland in the same place as the rest of the
UK—the same wording applies for European elections elsewhere in
the UK—and it also means that a mark cannot be used in
successive European elections.
The period has to be more than five years, and the gap between two
elections would be five years, as the hon. Gentleman pointed
out. Mr.
Reid: But obviously elections, although on a Thursday, are
not on exactly the same date every time, so if the period were five
years and six days, the mark could be used again. Could there not be
more sensible wording to provide that the same mark cannot be used
twice?
Paul
Goggins: My clear expectation is that would not happen,
for the reasons that I have given. However, I emphasise the point that
the regulation merely brings Northern Ireland in line with the rest of
the UK. The wording and the provision are the
same. On
part 8, the hon. Gentleman made the point that the regulations
state: “The
forms contained in this Appendix may be adapted so far as circumstances
require.” Again,
he brought to the Committee’s attention the experience in
Scotland. I simply emphasise that the circumstances in which that would
happen are rare. Indeed, the chief electoral officer is the returning
officer for Northern Ireland in the European elections. The provision
is not something that could be changed by an inexperienced member of
staff in some local administration; it will be the senior person, who
knows precisely what they are doing. It will give flexibility—if
that is necessary—and it will be administered in a professional
way; I offer the hon. Gentleman that
assurance. I
welcome the support of the right hon. Member for Lagan Valley. I always
appreciate his contribution to Committee discussions about electoral
law because he actually fights elections in Northern Ireland, unlike
others members of the Committee, and we are always grateful for his
advice. I agree wholeheartedly with his comments about voter turnout.
We all have an interest in getting voters out to vote at election time.
Frankly, whether they vote for us or not—we would prefer that
they did—we all want them to turn out and vote, because that is
at the heart of the democratic process.
Guidance
about the information to be made available to political parties on
polling day will be issued by the chief electoral officer, and it will
specify certain times when that information can be passed on so that we
can get the balance right. The right hon. Gentleman is right that there
will not be a requirement to say who has voted or how they have voted,
but merely to give the total number of people who have voted at that
particular time. I confirm that the additional documentation—he
mentioned specifically the 60-plus smartpass—will apply to other
elections as a document of identification. I will happily pass on his
remarks to those who administer the electoral system in Northern
Ireland, particularly the chief electoral officer. What he says is
true: the administration of elections in Northern Ireland is of very
high quality, and it is essential as an underpinning to the democratic
process.
Mr.
Reid: The Minister has not responded to one of the points
I made. In his opening speech, he talked about the unintentional errors
in the Great Britain regulations, which is why they had to come back.
Will he assure the Committee that the Northern Ireland
regulations have been thoroughly checked, and that there is absolutely
no possibility that we shall need to come back very late in the day and
revise that legislation
too?
Paul
Goggins: I am sure that had the Minister of State,
Ministry of Justice, my right hon. Friend the Member for North Swindon
been asked the same question, he would have said, “Well of
course”, but subsequently a minor change was required. The
officials—some of whom are not far away from us at the
moment—who oversee these things in the Northern Ireland Office,
do so in an assiduous and professional way. In so far as it is humanly
possible, the regulations are absolutely firm and fixed, and they will
do the job. I am absolutely confident, as we are here in Committee this
afternoon, that the regulations that will underpin the European
elections in Northern Ireland this June will do the job, and ensure
that the elections are carried out properly. Under the supervision of
the chief electoral officer, I am sure that they will be run in a
splendid way. I hope that offers some reassurance to the hon.
Gentleman.
The last time we met in Committee, he said that he had no difficult
questions for me, but today he was determined to make sure he had one
or two up his sleeve, and I am grateful to him for
that. I
hope that the Committee will support the
regulations. Question
put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That the
Committee has considered the draft European Parliamentary Elections
(Northern Ireland) (Amendment) Regulations
2009. Draft
European Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations
2009Resolved,
That the
Committee has considered the draft European Parliamentary Elections
(Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2009.—(Paul
Goggins.) 5.9
pm Committee
rose.
| 
