Proceeding contribution from Andrew Pelling (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 25 October 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Electoral Administration Bill.
Electoral Administration Bill
I am grateful for that point, although I appreciate that the Liberal Democrats are very much in favour of fixed-term Parliaments. When the Minister winds up, I shall be interested to hear how the process can work effectively. Other Liberal Democrat Members referred to the comments of Richard Mawrey QC about the use of the postal vote system. One of his comments that was not reported earlier in the debate was:"““Short of writing ‘Steal me’ on the envelopes, it is hard to see what more could be done to ensure their coming into the wrong hands.””" Many Conservative Members, as well as those in the other place, argued against the Government rushing into a large number of pilot schemes for all-postal voting. It is fair to say, however, that out of a desire to promote the maximum turnout in elections came a strong rush in the wrong direction. I very much hope that the Government will think again about the appropriateness of not moving much more quickly to a widespread use of personal identifiers. I appreciate the view that it is important to encourage the greatest level of registration. I referred earlier to the significant shortfall in registration in my local borough of Croydon. I am sure that a large amount of that under-registration involves black and ethnic minority communities. It is therefore very important for the registration issue to be addressed. Some will argue that they oppose personal identifiers because of the risk of depressing registration and, therefore, voter turnout. As the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Devine) said in his excellent maiden speech, however, it is also a case of politicians being straightforward with electors, and about the type of politics that they pursue. It is too easy for politicians to move into a process of false petitioning, or false consultation, and not to talk genuinely to residents and electors. It is clearly incumbent on politicians and the Government as a whole to ensure that it is indeed worthwhile for people to take part in elections, especially at local and regional level. It is often far too easy to agree with electors who say that it does not make much difference who is in control at local government level, given the increase in central Government powers over local government over the years. Another argument is that the London assembly has very few powers over the Mayor. I feel that I must vote against this important proposal because of the weakness in regard to personal identifiers. I also feel that it is incumbent on us as politicians to make it worthwhile for our residents to be able to vote in elections.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c249-50
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- ICT Candidates Administration Absent voting Age Conduct Devolution Campaigns Fraud Finance Elections Eligibility Electoral Commission Electoral register European Parliament Election observers General elections Local government Pilot schemes Northern Ireland Prosecutions Personation Political parties Proof of identity Polling stations Wales Scotland Registration Voting behaviour Voting methods Returning officers Timetables Ballot papers
- Legislation
- Electoral Administration Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-10-21 12:21:08 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269479
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269479
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269479