| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: I believe that this amendment is very important and should be given due consideration. As I said earlier, the reality is that this matter does not concern individuals who seek to be perverse when it comes to abusing the electoral system; it concerns organised abuse overall. Unless a date is specified for photographic evidence to be produced, then perhaps I may assure Members of the Committee that a diktat will go out from the IRA army council stating that no one will acquire or seek to provide photographic evidence when he or she comes to vote.
The backbone of the deception practised by Sinn Fein over the years has been the use of the medical card. It is not only a matter of existing medical cards being used improperly; it is a question of the mass reproduction of such cards. There are virtually factories producing medical cards. If one looks old enough and if one has any semblance of life at all, whether one is entitled to vote or not, one will be able to do so. In terms of getting rid of that most widespread of abuses, photographic evidence will be essential. I stress to the Minister that this amendment is well thought out and essential. It is one to which the Government should give due consideration.
5 p.m.
Lord Smith of Clifton: We on these Benches strongly support the amendment for the reasons that the noble Lords, Lord Maginnis and Lord Glentoran, have advanced.
Lord Molyneaux of Killead: I have a valid reason for supporting this amendment. One of the factories producing counterfeit medical cards was situated in my former constituency. Despite that, I managed to scrape through.
Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville: I support the amendment moved by my noble friend Lord Glentoran for slightly different reasons from those adopted by other noble Lords who have spoken. At Second Reading I said that I did not propose to revisit the delays that had been occasioned by the Government's hesitation in coming to conclusions on the matters of combating electoral fraud in Northern Ireland during the previous Parliament. However, I shall run through them briefly now in order to reinforce the need for pressure on deadlines and dates.
In the summer of 1997, under the then Secretary of State, the Northern Ireland Office set up a review of electoral fraud in Northern Ireland, shortly before the Select Committee in the other place embarked on its analysis. That committee had taken all its evidence and had published its report by March 1998. The Secretary of State gave us grounds to believe that the Government would be able to consider the issues
before the European elections of 1999, although I acknowledge that she did not guarantee that conclusions would have been reached or implemented.In the event, the Government did not publish their report on their review until October 1998 and did not reply to the Select Committee report until May 1999, which was a full year after a reply to such reports can normally be expected. When the final report from the Government on combating electoral fraud in Northern Ireland was not published until March 2001—just before the last general election—one could not help but feel that it had not been the Government's first priority. Although I have great respect for the noble and learned Lord who is responding to these debates—he has handled them impeccably—he must not be surprised if there is a certain concern about timetabling on this side of the Committee because of past experience.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: I entirely accept that. Our aim is to hold the Assembly elections in Northern Ireland in May 2003. Our target is for the removal of all forms, as the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, said, of non-photographic identification from the list of specified documents. I am concerned about disenfranchising a significant part of the population. Not everyone has a form of photographic identification as mentioned in the amendment—a driver's licence, a passport or a senior citizen's concessionary fare pass. Some people do not have such forms of identification and some people are rather conservative in their approach to identity cards of whatever kind. No doubt the time will come when such a situation will prevail. I am concerned about disenfranchising and disabling people from voting simply because they will not have photographic identification by May 2003.
I pay attention to the validity of the points made. I want to reflect on them, although I do not believe that I shall be able to say that by May 2003 everything will be in such order that everyone in Northern Ireland will be equipped with photographic identification. However, I accept that we should aim for that target.
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord for giving way. Can he give the Committee some idea of the percentage of the electorate that he believes do not have a driving licence, a passport or an old-age bus pass? I consider that the percentage would be remarkably small. Have the Government considered the matter or carried out any research? Can they tell me whether my assumption is correct?
Lord Williams of Mostyn: The noble Lord is quite right. I do not believe that it is possible to put a percentage on that. I was supported in that view by one of the contributions in the Commons. One of the Northern Ireland Members, Mr Robinson, said:
- "I would not vote for the Bill—this is how important the matter is to me—if I thought that the end result would be a significant number of genuine people being unable to vote.
- "an unspecified number of people, whose total is probably hard to determine, were able to abuse the system".—[Official Report, Commons, 31/10/01; col. 917.]
On abuse, I say to the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis, that it would be difficult for him to say mathematically how many people have benefited from the medical card factory in the former constituency of the noble Lord, Lord Molyneaux. I am not in a position to be more precise than that. Perhaps I should not have put that question to the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis, because, with a sinking heart, I feel that he may be about to answer me.
I shall look at the matter again to see whether I can return with something more definite by way of reply, but by May 2003 I doubt that we shall be morally certain that everyone eligible to vote will have photographic identification. I shall research further the answer to the question posed by the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis, but I do not believe that I shall be able to be more precise.
Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville: Before the noble and learned Lord sits down—there is no edge to this remark at all—I should say that the considerations to which he has drawn attention were part of the report of the Select Committee in March 1998. The sadness is that during the previous Parliament time was lost so that we are unable to meet sensible deadlines for what will be an important election.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: That is a perfectly reasonable observation, to which I can offer no satisfactory gloss.
Lord Glentoran: I thank the noble and learned Lord for that reply. I do not need to make the point that the election about which all noble Lords are talking will arguably be one of the most important elections ever held in Northern Ireland. It is the job of all noble Lords on all sides of the House to do their best to ensure that the electoral system is as clear of fraud and as fair as possible. In doing that we would not want to disenfranchise anyone. However, turning upside down what the noble and learned Lord has said, if one bracket of people can claim not to have any photographic evidence, we shall return to the realms of people saying on polling day, "I do not have any photographic evidence of myself". Without the problems of disenfranchisement, how do we challenge that and manage it? I feel that the onus is on the Government and their officials to ensure that every single soul on the electoral register in Northern Ireland has a form of photographic identification before May 2003.
I shall not divide the Committee this afternoon. In his comments the noble and learned Lord has been extremely helpful. I know that if at all possible he wants to deliver. On that basis, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass moved Amendment No. 14:
- After Clause 6, insert the following new clause—
The noble Lord said: Amendments Nos. 14 and 15 are probing amendments. Amendment No. 14 seeks to discover whether the investigative powers of the returning officer can be made more incisive if there has been a complaint about electoral abuse or if there is to be an electoral petition.
I admit that I am not the number one fan of the present Chief Electoral Officer. After the electoral abuse that occurred in my constituency, I found that there was no desire and indeed no willingness on his part to assist in discovering what the extent of that abuse was. Perhaps more attention should be given to this area. My experience was that not only was the Chief Electoral Officer reluctant to bring forward, within a reasonable timescale, information that should have been forthcoming to those who were forced to petition, but those who could have given evidence were absent from the electoral court when the case was heard.
If we are to have sanctions to ensure that there is no electoral abuse then it is incumbent on us all to ensure that there are methods and measures which can be employed to bring to book those who orchestrate—I use that term again—those who systematically orchestrate a fraud on the electorate of Northern Ireland. I have tabled Amendments Nos. 14 and 15 so that I can—and I hope that I shall—learn in some detail what Government intend to do to ensure that those provisions contained in the Bill are effective in preventing fraud and have bite if fraud still occurs. I beg to move.
"INVESTIGATION BY RETURNING OFFICER
In section 23 of the 1983 Act, after subsection (2) insert—
"(2A) Subject to subsection (2B), a returning officer shall investigate the conduct of a particular election for which he is the returning officer upon—
(a) receipt of a complaint that the election should be invalid;
(b) being notified of the presentation of a parliamentary election petition; or
(c) being notified of the presentation of a local election petition;
and make any information obtained in the course of such an investigation available to the parties to legal proceedings under Part III of this Act.
(2B) Subsection (2A) shall apply only to complaints or petitions which allege an irregularity in the registration of electors or the misuse of electoral identity cards in that election.""
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page