| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Grocott: My Lords, the situation in southern Africa is indeed extremely serious. The figures that I have on cereals requirements for the six countries—Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe—indicate a shortfall in production this year of some 3,577,000 tonnes. So there is no doubt whatever about the seriousness of the situation. As I have said, work has been done by the department; this is not a new problem. Africa will be very high on the agenda at the G8 summit. So far as concerns Zimbabwe, it is always difficult to be certain about the estimates, but there is no doubt that at least half of the shortfall in food production there is attributable to the activities of the regime.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, from these Benches we endorse the tributes that have been paid to the noble Lord, Lord Carter, who has always discharged his duties with skill and good humour—which has made him a friend to everyone on the Opposition Benches as well as within his own party. We shall miss him very much from now on; but we welcome the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, to his new post and we look forward to working with him.
As regards the Question on the Order Paper, is the noble Lord satisfied that the arrangements for distribution of foodstuffs in Zimbabwe in particular will take into consideration the stories that we have been reading about the diversion of aid into irregular channels and the use by the Mugabe regime of aid as a weapon in the political struggle? Will he—or the international community—make sure that aid is distributed solely through NGO channels? Has consideration been given to the possible use of the Churches in Zimbabwe in that regard?
Lord Grocott: My Lords, the reports about the situation in Zimbabwe and the allegations about food distribution being dependent on political factors are disturbing. We are very aware of that. However, I emphasise that the bilateral food and aid from the United Kingdom is distributed through non-governmental organisations that are well known and well respected throughout this country and are expert at monitoring and evaluating the way in which the food is distributed. I am not in any way minimising the fact that it will continue to be difficult, but that is an important safeguard.
Baroness Park of Monmouth: My Lords, does the Minister agree that one reason for the starvation is that the Mugabe regime forbade the planting of maize and wheat? I understand that wheat is now being planted. Is there any guarantee that it will not be burned, as the maize crops were? Is pressure going to be brought to bear on the SADC countries at the meeting in Johannesburg, which the Minister mentioned, to ensure that they bring pressure to bear on Mugabe? Otherwise, if the wheat crop also fails, the situation next year will be even more disastrous. Finally, will the Minister urge those countries to suggest that when Zimbabwe sells its tobacco—which will probably be the last crop that it sells for a long time—the foreign exchange money that the government propose to sequester is devoted to buying food for the country, not to buying tank arrangements designed to bring the population under control?
Lord Grocott: My Lords, we need to keep central in our minds the need to make sure that the aid gets to the people who need it in Zimbabwe. We must not put them in a double jeopardy of living under a government none of us would wish to live under and being short of food as well. That is at the centre of our objectives. The meeting in Johannesburg this time next week will be principally concerned with dealing with the immediate shortfalls. There is an immediate problem and a long-term one. The immediate one is obviously to make sure that the food gets to those who need it. That is why next week's meeting with all the countries of the region, plus donor countries and the UN, is so important. We must examine the need precisely and make sure that the supplies are there when they are needed. It is anticipated that the situation will be at its worst after September.
Postal Ballots
11.23 a.m.
Lord Mitchell asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether the results of the postal ballot experiment in the recent local government elections will encourage them to promote the use of online voting in all elections.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the Electoral Commission's evaluation of the electoral pilot schemes will provide a detailed assessment of the impact of new voting methods, including all-postal ballots and e-voting, to the Lord Chancellor by 2nd August. Early indications are that all-postal ballots can increase turnout and the various electronic means of voting were positively received. We will consider the commission's evaluation carefully before making decisions on the future use of postal voting and e-voting in elections.
Lord Mitchell: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Voter turnout in all elections, particularly among the under-35s, is still depressingly low, even though the use of postal voting in the recent local elections was a qualified success. Does the Minister agree that online voting using the telephone, the Internet and interactive television offers an attractive and convenient alternative—I stress that it is an alternative, not a substitute—to the local polling station and that its adoption will encourage many more people to come out and vote?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, without anticipating the report of the Electoral Commission, the immediate good news is that the electronic voting methods worked—in other words, there were no mechanical or electronic breakdowns. We very much hope that the Electoral Commission will find that they increased voter participation.
Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, is it not now clear that, in the London boroughs at least—I declare an interest as a joint president of the Association of London Government—the range of voting experiments offered across the city resulted in lower average turnouts than in 1998? Is the noble Lord also aware that in authorities that offered postal voting only there were very mixed results—some up, some down? In Newham, which pioneered e-voting online, turnout was also down. When are Ministers going to recognise that tinkering with the voting system will not reverse the widespread disillusionment with politics engendered by this Government's use of spin and evasion?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, that was rather predictable. Of course we do not think that changing the voting system will deal with the very real problems of low voter turnout. These are fundamentally political problems rather than mechanical ones. If that is what the noble Lord is saying, he is entirely right.
However, it would be foolish of us not to see what we can do to make voting easier. That is what the pilots are intended to do. As to the noble Lord's analysis of the London results, let us see what the Electoral Commission says.
Lord Kilclooney: My Lords, does the introduction of e-voting make it easier for one elector to cheat by voting in the place of another elector?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, there have been allegations that widespread postal voting makes it easier to cheat. Those allegations were made in this House last week. I understand that the issue that the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, raised then has been reported to the police, who are investigating. I cannot see how e-voting methods would increase the possibility of personation.
Baroness Hanham: My Lords, following on from the Minster's replies, will the House have an opportunity to discuss the Electoral Commission's report? I noticed him say that "we" will, by which I assume he meant the Government. May we have a firm assurance that the report can be debated in this House and that we can consider the various recommendations from the Electoral Commission?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, as the noble Baroness knows, the Government do not command the time of this House. There will be many opportunities, in the form of Starred or Unstarred Questions or debates, for these matters to be raised by the Opposition or by anybody else. I personally would welcome an opportunity to debate these matters in the House.
Lord Rennard: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the introduction of the secret ballot in 1872 was the most important democratic reform in the history of this country? Is he concerned that some of the experimental methods of voting mean that we can no longer be sure that ballot papers are completed in proper conditions of privacy—or even completed by the right person? Does he agree that proper safeguards need to be introduced to prevent the abuses that have been reported from the recent local elections before any consideration is given to rolling these methods out for further use?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the possibility of voting other than in a voting booth in a polling station has existed since 1918, when postal voting was introduced. The noble Lord's comments presumably apply to that as well as to the various forms of electronic voting. These are serious matters, which the Electoral Commission will have to consider in producing its report and any recommendations it wishes to make.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page