Elections Bill
Public Bill Committee, 16 September 2021.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Before we begin, I have some reminders. I encourage hon. Members to wear masks when they are not speaking. Please also do what you can to give one another and members of staff some space. Hansard colleagues would be grateful if Members emailed their speaking notes to hansardnotes@parliament.uk. Please switch electronic devices to silent mode. Tea and coffee are not allowed during sittings. We just have some private business before we start.
Examination of Witnesses
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Q118 We are now sitting in public and the proceedings are being broadcast. We will take oral evidence from Heather Harper MBE, chairman of Conservatives Abroad, who is on Zoom, from George Cunningham, chair of Liberal Democrats Overseas, in person—he will be brought in now—and from Anne Wafer, communications and social media officer for Labour International. She is having a bit of trouble joining us at the moment, but we will make a start.
Before the first Member asks a question, I remind all Members that questions should be limited to matters within the scope of the Bill and that we must stick to the timings in the programme order that the Committee has agreed. For this session, we have until 12.15 pm. Could the witnesses please introduce themselves? Heather, would you like to go first?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you. George Cunningham, would you like to introduce yourself?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you.
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
I thank the witnesses for giving up their time this morning to allow this Committee to find out a little more about your thoughts on this legislation. I am going to make the slight assumption that all the witnesses have had the experience of being an overseas elector. Could you all outline your own experiences of being an overseas elector, in terms of being able to receive and return a ballot paper in time to make the deadline for the election? I ask because we have seen evidence showing that a lot of overseas electors’ votes do not get counted because they do not get returned in time. Mr Cunningham, would you like to go first and outline any experiences that you have had that the Committee would benefit from knowing aboutQ ?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you. Heather, would you like to add anything?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q I have one follow-up question. There have been concerns raised that this legislation, by expanding the franchise for overseas electors and removing the 15-year limit, would also allow permissible donors. I was just wondering if the witnesses had any thoughts on whether those two issues should be separated: the right to vote and the issues of keeping transparency in regard to money in British politics separate. Do you have any thoughts, Mr Cunningham, on the separation of financial donations and the franchise?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Heather, would you like to add anything to that?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
A big welcome to our two witnesses. George, it is lovely to see you again in person, and Heather it is very good to see you again. Is it the case that Anne is still unable to join us?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Unfortunately, we have no news, so we have to press on.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Not to worry, but in principle, it is great to have a cross-party panel to discuss this part of the Bill. Picking up on Heather’s theme of British citizens abroad not being foreign: do you think they should be treated differently in any way to citizens here in the UK? There will be a few logistical differences, but do you think we ought to endeavour to treat them as similarly as possible to other kinds of citizens on the electoral register?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Thank you, that is very clear. George, if I could pull up this theme with you, can you describe a few ways that British citizens abroad do have a legitimate interest in politics here? For example, I know that you have a specialism in foreign affairs—there is one heading to start with. Perhaps, you can go from there?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Thank you so much. I have one last question to both witnesses. Members of the Committee will know that I am very keen on the correct use of terms in this area. When we say “disenfranchise,” we should talk very specifically about the ability to be registered to vote or not to be registered to vote. This area of the Bill actually is one of the narrow areas where that is a relevant concept, because of course it seeks to enfranchise more. Currently, there is disenfranchisement happening for citizens who have been abroad for more than 15 years. I wonder whether you might have some examples or anecdotes from your members or friends of how that feels—on the day that one has lived abroad for more than 15 years, one is suddenly kicked off. Perhaps you might have some examples of how that feels from your members’ perspectives.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Before I bring Patrick Grady in, we have good news and bad news. The good news is that the technical fault is nearly resolved; the bad news is that we are not quite there yet. Minister and Cat Smith, would you be content to repeat your questions to Anne Wafer once she joins, if we have time?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
I am happy to, as long as it does not take time away from colleagues.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Is the Committee content with that?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you.
Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North)
I am interested in the point about the children of overseas voters, because one of the effects of removing the 15-year limit is that there could be voters who have lived overseas for 15, 16, 17 or 18 years. An individual can vote at the age of 16 in the Scottish Parliament now, and I think it is the same in the Welsh Senedd elections. Sixteen-year-olds cannot vote in the UK yet, but someone who has been outside the UK for 16, 17 or, indeed, 18 years will be able to vote. There will be people joining the electoral register at the age of 18 who have spent their whole lives without a vote in the UK, while people who have spent the equivalent amount of time away from the UK will now continue to be able to vote. I would be interested in any reflections on that.Q
I was also interested in something you said in passing, George, about an overseas constituency. I wonder if either of the panellists have a view on that. At the moment, a vote goes towards wherever the voter last resided, and I can well understand the point that although someone maintains an affinity for their country and has citizenship of the UK, surely after a considerable passage of time the local issues in the constituency will have changed considerably. Not every single overseas voter will still be paying attention to the exact circumstances in the constituency in which they lived. Is there any merit in the concept—which exists in other parliamentary democracies—of a dedicated overseas constituency that is represented by an MP for the overseas?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Before you answer, may I interrupt to say that our third witness, Anne Wafer, is now with us. Anne, would you introduce yourself to the Committee please?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
No, that is a lovely introduction and we will leave it to the first two witnesses to answer that question first, and then you can come in, Anne. That will be fine. Heather, would you like to go first?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Only one member of the Committee has indicated that they wish to ask a question, so I now call Cat Smith, the Opposition spokesperson, and then the Minister to ask a couple of catch-up questions.
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q It is good to have you with us, Anne, having resolved the technical issues. My opening question to the other panellists, before you joined us, was about the experience of voting as an overseas elector and delays in the postal system. Do you have any thoughts on how the Bill could be improved to ensure that overseas electors who have a ballot could return it in time for the close of poll?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q If I might interrupt slightly, Anne—I apologise—it might help if I direct some more specific questions to you, because I did ask a specific question to both the other witnesses this morning about political donations. Concerns have been raised about how extending the franchise also makes overseas electors permissible donors, with no time limit. Do you think there is merit in separating permissible donors from eligible electors?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Very quickly, you told the Committee earlier that you left the UK in 1978 and are not entirely sure if or where you were registered when you left. You were asking how you could check that you were registered to vote, and there are no records, so do you recognise the potential for electoral fraud, given the lack of records going back more than 15 years?Q
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you, Anne. We are running out of time, so I would just like to squeeze the Minister in.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Anne, welcome. It is lovely to have you with us and thank you so much for your time. If I may start with a reassurance for you personally, given what you have been saying, the Bill includes exactly what you are arguing for: that you should be able to prove either last residence or registration, which are the two tracks that answer your concern.Q
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
That’s right, Anne.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q We think the Bill as constructed covers, if you like, children in both categories—those who were born abroad and those who were born in the UK and moved. We think we have got that covered with the residency and registration idea. May I just—
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Absolutely, yes.
There are three questions I put to the witnesses previously. I will ask them swiftly. I asked, first, whether witnesses thought that British citizens overseas should be treated as equally as possible with British citizens in the UK. Secondly, I invite you to suggest what kinds of policy topic matter to overseas citizens. In other words, what are their interests in UK politics? For example, pensions are one interest, but there might be others. Thirdly, I wonder whether you have examples from your membership, your friends or your network of how people feel when they get, effectively, kicked off the register —disenfranchised, in the proper sense of the word.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Of course. Should British citizens overseas be treated as equally as possible with those in the UK?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Those are great examples. Thank you so much—they are a bit broader than we might normally discuss. That is really helpful.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Anne, we have just one minute left. May I ask you the third question to finish the set? In this area, without reform, people are essentially kicked off the register a day after they have been 15 years abroad. How does that feel?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you, Anne. Unfortunately, we have come to the end of our time. May I thank all the witnesses for their evidence this morning and the Members for their questions? We are now going to move on to the next panel.
Examination of Witness
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Q We will now hear oral evidence from Maurice Mcleod, chief executive of Race on the Agenda. For this session, we have until 1 o’clock. Welcome, Maurice. Can you please introduce yourself for the purpose of the record?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you. Minister, would like to come in first on this question?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Welcome, Maurice; it is good to have you with us this morning. Can you explain first of all whether you feel that the policy of having a free local voter card to accompany voter identification, so that is for the 2% of people we anticipate may not have the ID that is being asked for, will be a good thing and whether there may be any points that you suggest would need to be taken into account in its design?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Okay, thanks for that initial view. In that case, would you join me in letting the message go out from this Bill Committee and witnesses that we all want to encourage as many people as possible to register to vote and to participate?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q Thank you Maurice for your time this morning. We have seen American civil rights groups campaigning quite strongly about the introduction in some US states of ID requirements to access the ballot. They have found that, when it comes to providing ID, some groups are finding it harder to prove their identity than others. In this country it has been very difficult for me to find out what level of ID people hold based on their race; it is not data that is held by the DVLA with driving licenses, nor the Home Office with passports. Can you share with the Committee your understanding of what groups are less likely to have photo ID?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q To break that down a little bit further, I have seen evidence that Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities are also less likely to have ID. The free local voter card, proposed by this legislation, looks set to be delivered by local authorities. Do you have any insight into how people who are not resident in the same local authority for any length of time might have their access to those ID cards impacted?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q That final point links to my last question. You have alluded to a hostile environment, and a nervousness to engage with—what is seen as—an establishment. Do you think that the requirement to show voter ID will increase or decrease participation among black voters?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Thank you so much for your time.
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
Maurice, it is nice to talk to you, and thank you for coming to the Committee. I note that you are a Labour councillor in Battersea and a self-confessed Corbynite, and that you previously described the Government asQ
“Diluting rights, denying racism, delegitimising protest, and diminishing voter turnout.”
You added:
“Anyone who doesn’t see a concerted campaign at work here simply isn’t looking.”
What is that concerted campaign?
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
Q Given your description of voter fraud as non-existent—you have just made that claim now—what do you make of the evidence that we have heard of voter fraud in Tower Hamlets, Birmingham and my constituency, Peterborough? Did that not exist?
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
Q You tweeted that the Government
“wants to bring in Voter ID to tackle non-existent voter fraud.”
I suggest that you take a look at the evidence from Peter Golds, Lord Pickles and others yesterday; it may enlighten you.
In 2018, you argued that people should be able to vote online. You then dismissed one social media user’s comment about fraud by saying,
“Sure, I understand the security risks but they are no greater than the risks of postal voting or even voting in person.”
What are those risks of postal voting or voting in person?
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
But that is not quite what you said. You said:
“Sure, I understand the security risks”.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Order. Online voting is not in the Bill. He was entitled to respond, but we are going a little bit wider than we should. Do you have a small supplementary?
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
Q Yes, absolutely. In 2019, you claimed that
“Voter ID will have a terrible impact on voter turnout.”
Why do you think that this impact has not been seen in any of the Cabinet Office trials, or indeed over many years in Northern Ireland?
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
No, I think you are wrong.
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
Are you arguing that there are no—
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Order. I think we will move on. You have had quite a few questions. Patrick Grady is waiting to come in.
Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North)
Q Thank you, Ms Rees. If we read the evidence from yesterday, we will see that Lord Pickles and Richard Mawrey described Tower Hamlets as extreme and isolated. Richard Mawrey said:
“Voter fraud played a very small part, funnily enough, in Tower Hamlets.”––[Official Report, Elections Public Bill Committee, 15 September 2021; c. 14, Q13.]
Thank you, Maurice; your contributions have been extremely helpful. You spoke a little bit about automatic voter registration. Could you say a little more about how you think that might work in practice and what impact it could have on turnout and participation, particularly among minority communities? Could you also say something about access to postal voting among minority communities and what impact that has? Does that help or hinder turnout, participation and engagement?
In Scotland, we have recently extended the franchise for Scottish Parliament elections to pretty much everyone with settled status, including EU nationals and people with settled refugee status. Are there any lessons that might be learned from that, particularly in terms of the message it might send to counteract some of what you have described as the hostile environment and how it might make it clear that everyone is welcome and everyone ought to participate in the democratic system?
Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North)
Q It was about how postal voting helps with participation and turnout in minority communities? Then I asked about expanding the franchise.
Picking up on what you said there, however, that relates to some of what was discussed yesterday. Is there something about civic education and awareness raising about the importance of participation in our democratic systems among minority communities that might also help to increase turnout and participation?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
I have Tom Randall, followed by Fleur Anderson, Kate Hollern and Jerome Mayhew. If there is time at the end, I will bring Paul Bristow back in.
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
Thank you.
Tom Randall (Conservative, Gedling)
Mr Mcleod, good afternoon. I would just like to clarify a couple of points. You said in your evidence earlier that you had seen stuff. You are here as the chief executive of a charity, Race on the Agenda. The charity has not commissioned any research into this matter at all?Q
Tom Randall (Conservative, Gedling)
Q So, there is no primary evidence about participation? You are just commenting on stuff that you have seen in the press or elsewhere?
Tom Randall (Conservative, Gedling)
Q Sure. We heard some evidence yesterday about voter fraud and where it has occurred. We heard evidence from Tower Hamlets, as we discussed, and Slough and inner-city Birmingham, where voter fraud has occurred. Those places tend to have higher non-white populations than other places. Would you agree that the serious victims of voter fraud are ethnic minority people?
Tom Randall (Conservative, Gedling)
Q To the extent that it does occur, if voter fraud affects an area, it is more likely to affect—as we heard yesterday, the biggest victims in Tower Hamlets were the Bangladeshi population, who were disenfranchised because an election was stolen from them. If we agree that it is a problem, it is going to affect non-white populations in this country.
Tom Randall (Conservative, Gedling)
Q Sorry, you say you don’t know, but perhaps examples from Tower Hamlets are more pertinent than examples from the United States.
Tom Randall (Conservative, Gedling)
Q Finally from me, we talk about how it affects ethnic minority groups, but that is not one group of people. Do you accept that there is a lot of diversity within that? When you say that this might have a particular effect on minority groups, what does that mean in practice?
Tom Randall (Conservative, Gedling)
Yes.
Tom Randall (Conservative, Gedling)
Q My understanding is that Cabinet Office data suggests the reverse of that. That is your supposition on this point, but you have commissioned no research to back that up?
Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North)
On a point of order, Ms Rees. Can I just confirm that witnesses have been invited to speak to this Committee on the basis of their experience and there is no requirement or expectation of any of the witnesses who appear today or who appeared yesterday to back up their evidence with primary source research evidence? We have not asked any other witness to detail the evidential base. We are entitled to ask questions and witnesses are entitled to respond on the basis of their experience. Can I confirm that, please?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you, Mr Grady. The witnesses have been invited to give evidence on the basis of their experience. They do not have to have any research as a back-up. We are very grateful that the witnesses have agreed to come along and give evidence.
Chris Clarkson (Conservative, Heywood and Middleton)
Further to that point of order, Ms Rees. Is it not the purpose of this Committee to scrutinise any evidence that is given to us, regardless of whether it is backed up by data?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Yes, it is perfectly proper to ask any questions you want, but I was just clarifying that it is not necessary for the witness to be backed up by research.
Chris Clarkson (Conservative, Heywood and Middleton)
But it is appropriate for us to push back if we do not agree?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Of course. You can ask scrutinising, relevant questions.
Fleur Anderson (Labour, Putney)
Good afternoon, Maurice. Thank you for coming to speak to the Committee. You said earlier that this does not solve the problem. Can you say anything about things that would solve the problem that you see of lower voting numbers among the black community? Just for the record, there was only one trial of the ID pilot scheme in the format that is in the Bill. That was in Woking, which has an 84% white population, so perhaps you could say that the Government also do not have the primary evidence that is needed.Q
But if the Bill does go ahead in this way and ID cards are expected, are there any other measures that could mitigate the potential for suppression? From your experience of working with the black community, what would need to be put in place that would make this less of a bad deal?
Kate Hollern (Labour, Blackburn)
Thank you for attending this session. It is interesting that you are the first black witness that we have had and you were invited along to talk about race. I apologise on behalf of the Committee for the way you were treated. The evidence we had yesterday from Peter Golds and Eric Pickles verified that election fraud does happen on very rare occasions. I would like to pick up your point about reaching out to communities and how we engage, encourage and assist people to get involved in the democratic process. Is there anything in the Bill that will enhance that communication and support?Q
I have just checked the allegation of fraud made by the hon. Member for Peterborough and, in those cases, it was found that no offences were committed. Does the message that electoral fraud has happened in black and ethnic minority communities act to disfranchise those communities, which we are trying to reach?
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
On a point of order, Ms Rees.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
I do not really want to go down the road of more points of order. The Committee is becoming quite agitated. If there is anything you would like to raise, perhaps it could be raised after the witnesses have left. Would the Committee be content with that? We are against the clock, and more Members would like to come in.
Paul Bristow (Conservative, Peterborough)
I am perfectly happy to raise my point afterwards, but it is worth noting that it has been implied that my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling and I were unreasonable in our questioning, and that it may be because the witness comes from an ethnic minority. It is perfectly legitimate to place on record that that is not the case. Our questions were perfectly in order. I find it insulting that the hon. Member for Blackburn would even suggest such a thing.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Can we leave it there, please? Your comments are on the record now. We need to move on and take more questions, but your point is noted.
Kate Hollern (Labour, Blackburn)
Q A final question from me. Ladies wearing face coverings turning up to polling stations will require there to be a lot more female staff in polling stations. How can that be managed, and how can we reassure communities that polling stations will have the facilities and staff required?
Kate Hollern (Labour, Blackburn)
Q Thank you very much. Is the voter ID scheme as set out in the Bill compatible with the right to vote under the European convention on human rights, particularly when read with the anti-discrimination provision in article 14 in mind?
Kate Hollern (Labour, Blackburn)
Q There is some suggestion that the Bill could contradict the Human Rights Act. Do you have any experience or knowledge of that?
Kate Hollern (Labour, Blackburn)
Very finally, how do you—
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
We have to move on. I promised Jerome Mayhew that he could come in, so if we have time at the end, I will bring you and Paul Bristow back in, Ms Hollern. We are against the clock. Mr Mayhew?
Jerome Mayhew (Conservative, Broadland)
ThankQ you very much, Ms Rees. Maurice, thank you very much for taking part in this evidence session. In your primary evidence, you suggested that you were very concerned about the voter participation of BAME groups if photo ID were required. The rationale that you gave—I took a note at the time—was that between 47% and 50% of BAME potential voters had photo ID. Is that correct? Is that your view?
Jerome Mayhew (Conservative, Broadland)
In your evidence earlier on today, you suggested that when you started to look at BAME voters, the incidence of availability of photo ID dropped to 47% to 50%. Is that your view?
Jerome Mayhew (Conservative, Broadland)
Q So roughly that. I am not holding you to a particular percentage, but roughly 50%. That is the basis of your concern, or one of the bases of your concern, about the fear of reduced voter participation in black and ethnic minority communities. Is that right?
Jerome Mayhew (Conservative, Broadland)
Q We have a slight advantage. I am not going to try to trip you up on this; I am just going to read out some data that we have the advantage of having. In March of this year, the Cabinet Office undertook some independent research, done by the independent research company IFF, in which they telephone interviewed 8,500 people from right across the country to establish the facts—the real data—behind that assertion. Their conclusion was that among the general population, 98% of the population had relevant photo ID, and in the BAME communities, that figure was 99%. Given that very significant difference between your concern that it was less than 50% and the reality that it is 99%, would you accept that your concerns are based on a false premise and that you are, to that extent at least, reassured?
Jerome Mayhew (Conservative, Broadland)
Q I quite understand. We have already heard that “BAME” includes a large number of sub-groups, but under the methodology of that independent research, one of the key areas was
“What percentage of the eligible population do not hold at least one form of photo ID currently under consideration for the voter ID requirement?”
and
“What is the level of ownership of the required photographic ID in groups with protected characteristics? specifically with reference to:
Race or ethnicity
Disability; and
Age.”
This was a very thorough and independent piece of research, and if that is the case—you can look at it on the gov.uk website, so it is publicly available—that would, as you say, provide you with a degree of reassurance.
Jerome Mayhew (Conservative, Broadland)
I agree, and you made some very good points. Thank you very much.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Order. I am afraid that brings us to the end of the time allotted to the Committee to ask questions, and indeed for this morning’s session. On behalf of the Committee, I thank our witness for his evidence. The Committee will meet again here at 2 pm this afternoon to continue taking oral evidence. I invite the Government Whip to move the adjournment.
Gavin Millar QC gave evidence.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Q159 We are now sitting in public and the proceedings are being broadcast. I remind Members about the public health guidance and that electronic devices should be switched to silent.
We will now hear oral evidence from Gavin Millar QC of Matrix Chambers. Thank you very much for joining us. Before we begin, I remind Members that questions should be limited to matters within the scope of the Bill and that we must stick to the timings in the programme order that the Committee has agreed. For this session, we have until 2.45 pm. Would the witness please introduce himself for the record?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you. Minister, would you like to open the questioning?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
I think it is Cat Smith’s turn to go first.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
It looks like an empty chair.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Indeed.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Shall I bring in other members of the Committee? Patrick Grady, would you like to ask a question? [Interruption.] Oh, hang on.
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
I apologise to our witness. I am afraid I had some lift troubles, trying to get down to the first floor. I thank you for your time before the Committee. Will you outline anything that you feel could have been included in the legislation, or that could be amended, to strengthen the integrity of the ballot?Q
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
I will try repeating my question. Is there anything that you feel is missing from the legislation that would strengthen elections, or anything that is amendable that needs to be tightened up?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q Thank you. I have one follow-up question. The legislation impacts on third-party campaigners, and you have already said that the regulations for elections run across many different pieces of legislation. We do not have that single set of rules for participation. Do you think that the changes to third-party campaigners strike the right balance between engaging third-party campaigners in the democratic process and transparency in terms of the source of political money?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q Under clause 25, the Minister would also have the power to add or remove categories of campaigners from being permitted to campaign in elections. Do you have some concern about that?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Minister?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
I have no further questions but I am very grateful to Mr Millar for giving his time.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Thank you. Jerome Mayhew.
Jerome Mayhew (Conservative, Broadland)
May I ask a question of clarification on the evidence that we have just heard? First, thank you very much for coming to give evidence, Mr Millar. It is a great pleasure to have someone of your expertise and experience assisting the Committee.Q
You expressed a concern a moment ago that the Minister, under clause 25, would have the ability to add to the list of categories. There is a rationale for that, which I hope we can agree on: as the sector develops, there will potentially be a need for the legislation to respond to growth in the sector, and it would be beneficial were the legislation able to satisfy that need. In those circumstances, is it not reasonable for the legislation to allow for an affirmative procedure in both Houses to give Parliament’s consent to the decision of the Minister? I am really challenging the rather bold assertion that it is the Minister who decides. It is not, is it? It is Parliament that will decide, and not just by the negative procedure; it is by the affirmative procedure in both Houses. Is that correct?
Jerome Mayhew (Conservative, Broadland)
I am very grateful. That is the only thing I wanted to clarify.
Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North)
On the provision for the Minister to set a statement for the Electoral Commission, the Government argue, I think, that it is not uncommon for the Government to set a policy framework approved by Parliament for independent regulators. However, I wonder whether you agree that the Electoral Commission is strictly comparable to Ofgem, Ofsted or some other independent regulators, given that it regulates the candidates and the people who are elected to make these laws in the first place. Do you have any reflections on that?Q
Could you also say a little more on the value or otherwise of a more comprehensive effort to consolidate electoral law? We have a lot of Representation of the People Acts. This is not a representation of the people Bill; it has been called the Elections Bill. I do not know whether there is any legislative or theological difference between the titling of these different Bills and Acts, or the things that they have done over the years. Where do you see the merit in perhaps a stronger effort to consolidate the different pieces of legislation that govern the electoral framework?
Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North)
Thank you. That is really helpful.
Fleur Anderson (Labour, Putney)
Thank you, Mr Millar. It is a pleasure to see you this afternoon, and thank you for your evidence. Can I just ask about the relationship between this Bill and the European convention on human rights, particular the right to vote, obviously? Concerns have been expressed, for example by the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community, among others, that the Bill will reduce the ability to vote and will therefore contravene article 3 of the first protocol, which states that conditions imposed by the state must not curtail the rights in question in any way. Do you think that the voter ID scheme set out in the Bill is compatible with the European convention on human rights? Does it risk not being compatible? You have said that the law is unclear in some ways—is it unclear? If someone went to a polling station on election day without voter ID and was unable to get it, because the council was swamped by other such requests, and so they could not vote, could they then return to the European convention on human rights and say that their right to vote had been curtailed? Is that possible under the Bill? If there should be changes, what changes would you makeQ ?
Fleur Anderson (Labour, Putney)
That is very concerning. Thank you.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
If there are no further questions from Members, I thank our witness for his evidence.
Examination of Witness
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Q Thank you very much for joining us this afternoon, Ms Hadi. Would you please introduce yourself for the record?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
We have until 3.30 pm for this panel. Minister, would you like to start with the first question?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Thank you so much for joining us today, Ms Hadi; it is great to have you with us. An important element of the Bill deals with accessibility, which is obviously an area of expertise for your organisation. The Bill introduces a new statutory duty on returning officers to support all voters with disabilities—the widest possible range—and that duty is to be supported by guidance from the Electoral Commission. What would you like to see reflected in that guidance, and what are your biggest concerns about the current process of voting for people with disabilities.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Absolutely right, Ms Hadi. I am really grateful to you for laying that out, because I could not agree more about the need for that thinking at every stage of registration and onwards through to voting. Indeed, for what it is worth, I am sure that also applies to many other services from local authorities, so I hope there is good working across councils that can be shared.
As you rightly say, we all want to see disabled voters, or voters with any condition or extra accessibility need, able to take part fully. What do you think ought to be focused on in communicating the changes encapsulated in this Bill? How could that be done with your members, for example, or others?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q I agree, and the plans published alongside the Bill put money and time towards doing that, which we would all agree is the right thing to do.
May I draw on your experience of voting as a blind person—as a person with a visual impairment? I would guess that you have used the tactile voting device. Could you describe to the Committee what it has been like using that device? What are its drawbacks and advantages?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
I apologise for making an assumption.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q When in your experience a thing goes out of date or could be superseded by innovation and new ideas, how do you think that could be accommodated in law? Having listened to your words, I think we have got a really good example here of one of the core issues; as you say, the device was of its time some decades ago now, but it is prescribed in law. We have a problem of it being out of date, yet prescribed. How do you think innovation, which you may have used elsewhere in your life—maybe you can share your insight—can be provided for in law?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Thank you. This is my last question, just to complete the set, if you like. I understand your point that there could be difference across the country, but clause 8 seeks to make support mandatory. Do you think clause 8 and making it mandatory is sufficient?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
It is very helpful that you close with the point that it must be specified through guidance, because that is indeed what the intention is. It is also what one of our witnesses yesterday agreed was where much of the work should be done.
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Fazilet, welcome to the Committee and thank you very much for the contributions you have made so far. I have a couple of questions.Q
You opened your remarks by describing how you felt that the legislation is turning back the clock, particularly for voters who are blind or partially sighted. If I understood correctly, that is because the 1983 Act wording would be rescinded and there would be much more flexibility for local authorities to have potentially quite different ways of supporting blind and partially sighted voters. That would create something of a postcode lottery. What would the challenges then be for voters with a disability or impairment who have perhaps moved house to a different local authority area and might then get a different level of service or a different system to facilitate their needs? Would that be an additional barrier to voting for disabled people?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q I have heard representations from various different disability charities and advocacy groups representing disabled people about the accessibility challenges of local authority buildings. Part of this legislation relates to voter ID. You have mentioned that you have some concerns about that. Putting those concerns slightly to one side, do you have any concerns about the barriers that would be faced by disabled voters in trying to access the free voter ID that would be administered by local authorities—not the polling stations, but the free ID cards?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Thank you.
Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North)
Q Thank you, Fazilet, that is really very helpful. I have quite a technical question about the wording in the legislation and what the Government propose. What they propose to do is to take out the wording that currently exists about prescribing devices for eligible voters who are blind or partially sighted, and to replace it with a more general paragraph about supplying, as you already mentioned,
“such equipment as it is reasonable…for the purposes of enabling or making it easier for, relevant persons”.
Relevant persons would include blind or partially sighted people, but also people with other disabilities or impairments or difficulties.
Is there any reason why you could not just have both? You could keep the specific provisions, perhaps updating them so we are not limiting this to one specific piece of advice, and making a bit of a tweak so that we talk more generally about equipment that might change over time with technology, but keep those provisions and add in the extra requirement for a wider group of voters who might have difficulty accessing the polling stations. Do you see any incompatibility with that approach?
Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North)
Thank you. That is very helpful.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
If there are no further questions from Members, I thank the witness for giving evidence today. It is much appreciated.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
We will now hear oral evidence.
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
On a point of order, Ms Rees. A motion to approve an instruction has been laid by the Government and will be heard on the Floor of the House on Monday, regarding expanding the Elections Bill to include electoral voting systems, specifically in terms of mayoralties within England and police and crime commissioners. Would it be in order to ask questions of Dr Renwick about electoral systems, given that they are not currently in the scope of the Bill?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
My understanding is that matter is not currently in the scope of the Bill. I am aware that the motion is on the Order Paper for Monday.
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Further to that point of order, is it possible for the Committee to take evidence on electoral systems at any future scheduled evidence sessions that would take place after Monday, when such systems presumably would become part of the Bill?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
If it is possible to have a supplementary programme motion, then that could be added, but that is not a matter for me. That is usually done through the usual channels.
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Thank you, Ms Rees.
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
Q I welcome Dr Alan Renwick, deputy director of the constitution unit at University College London. Thank you very much for joining us. We have until 4.15 pm for this session. Please could you introduce yourself?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q Dr Renwick, thank you so much for your time this afternoon. May I begin by asking you about the Electoral Commission? The legislation proposes some changes to the way the Electoral Commission is managed, in terms of the Government setting out a strategic document to direct the work of the commission. It also proposes slight changes to the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission by adding a new Minister to a committee that already has a Government bias. Do you have any examples of how electoral commissions work in other democracies and the level of Government interference over regulators?
Cat Smith (Labour, Lancaster and Fleetwood)
Q You said that the Electoral Commission is also accountable to the Welsh Senedd and the Scottish Parliament; it is also funded by both those Parliaments. Could you say what consideration the Committee should give to any change due to a strategy and policy statement driven by a UK Parliament, and what tensions that could potentially create within the Union?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Thank you very much for joining us, Dr Renwick; it is very good to have your expertise. May I make use of that expertise with a relatively simple starting question? Clause 14 deals with membership of the Speaker’s Committee, and every so often we hear a misrepresentation—I think I just heard the hon. Lady from the Opposition doing this—suggesting that there will be an extra Minister of the Crown added to the Speaker’s Committee. Could you help us to confirm that concurrent powers, which is what clause 14 contains and which, as you will recall, comes in the history of having made a transfer of functions order before, mean that this will be a question of a substitute Minister—essentially a junior when the senior is too busy?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Thank you. It is really helpful to get that on the record. It is worth noting that, as well as Ministers, there are shadow Ministers on the Speaker’s Committee—there is Front-Bench involvement on both sides. Going to the Back-Bench members of the committee, can you confirm that under existing law, which is not changed by this Bill, the Speaker may appoint the five Back-Bench members of the committee—that is his power to do?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q How would you change what is, therefore, extant in legislation: that the Speaker would have the ability to appoint five Back-Bench members?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Thank you. That has given us some food for thought, and a very helpful historical recap, as well.
Your points about the Sewel convention were interesting. I wanted to have your written evidence in front of us, as well as what you have just said. In your written evidence you say the proposed strategy and policy statement violates the Sewel convention. Your words just now were accurate in saying that the Sewel convention says that this House will not normally legislate for affairs that are devolved without consent. You have clarified in your words here today that it is the existence or otherwise of an LCM that would violate the Sewel convention. For absolute clarity, can you confirm that the strategy and policy statement does not, in its own right, violate the Sewel convention, but instead, the behaviour and procedure around it is where you direct those comments?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q It is really helpful to have been able to do that today. From your experience monitoring many of these Bills and exchanges, I am sure you would say that it takes a little time for that position to emerge, both in terms of what the intention of the Executive is in any one of those legislatures, and then what the intention of the legislature is. It takes some time. There is not yet necessarily a moment in this Bill where you could have made a statement saying this violates the Sewel convention.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q That is good to have confirmed. My final question is about the strategy and policy statement and its procedure in Parliament. You gave the view that it would be wrong for the Government to produce that statement, and I think I am quoting you, “without the appropriate degree of scrutiny.” Can you explain what is not appropriate about the statement being approved by both Houses of Parliament?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q But Parliament—in the Chamber twice—does provide for a debate as you have described.
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Q Thank you for that very helpful perspective. Essentially you argue that this measure ought to be subject to the full primary procedure. May I ask one last clarifying question, and then I will get the Executive to shut up and hand over to the Back Benchers, which is, I am sure, a principle you agree with, Alan. Can you confirm that the Bill’s measures leave in place, do not affect, and take nothing away from the governance structure and statutory provisions for the Electoral Commission’s board and commissioners, which include party figures, cross-party figures and non-party figures, as you desire?
Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North)
Thank you, Alan. As always, it is good to debate with you and really good to have your expertise.
Brendan O'Hara (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)
We have spoken to various witnesses, including a former electoral commissioner, over the last couple of days about the statutory policy statement. No one seems to have been aware that this proposal was coming. Were you aware of it being trailed or discussed privately with either the devolved Administrations or in academic circles, to see whether the changes would enhance and improve the independence and the working of the Electoral CommissionQ ?
Brendan O'Hara (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)
Q Can I ask you then to speculate on why it has not been done as you would have expected and as it has been done in the past? Why do you think it has been done in this way?
Brendan O'Hara (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)
Q Finally, increasing public trust in electoral systems and the institutions that support them has been a recurring theme throughout this evidence session. Do you think that the proposal from the Government will increase or decrease public trust in the independence of the Electoral Commission?
Christina Rees (Labour/Co-operative, Neath)
If there are no further questions from Members, thank you, Dr Renwick, for your evidence. It is much appreciated. The Committee will next meet at 9.25 am on Wednesday 22 September to begin clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill.