Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Peter Robinson (Democratic Unionist Party) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 19 April 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.


Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill

We are dealing with this Bill, and the Committee cannot amend a Bill that is being considered in another House. We must deal with the Bill that is in front of us. Clearly, if the Committee removed subsections (1) and (2), as the hon. Lady asks us to do, we would not have anonymous registration in Northern Ireland. It is particularly important that we have that provision in Northern Ireland, although I endorse the caveats that she mentioned, because I am unhappy about the manner in which the provision is being introduced in the Bill. None the less, I believe that it is essential that that should happen. I am particularly uncomfortable about approving measures that are subject to provisions that the Secretary of State will produce at some later stage. Anything we say at this stage is subject to the caveat that it depends on whether we approve the later provisions. Clearly, given the different arrangements in Northern Ireland, the provisions will not be identical to those that apply in other parts of the United Kingdom, but they should share the same underlying principles. Establishing a system of anonymous registration for people whose safety could be compromised if their addresses were known is a helpful step forward. In respect of the consultation responses, I note that Sinn Fein was the only party opposed to anonymous registration, but that is not really surprising. I also found that the Ulster Unionist party put in no response at all, and my party did the same—largely, I assume, because both parties are happy with the Bill. I also note that the Electoral Commission expressed strong support for the introduction of anonymous registration. It is particularly relevant to Northern Ireland in view of threats to the security forces and members of the Prison Service. My right hon. and hon. Friends will be well aware of IRA intelligence-gathering operations, whether it be the raids at Castlereagh police station and Dundonald house or the Stormontgate affair, after which many people—police officers and others—were informed that their details had been compromised. There is good cause for servants of the Crown to have some anonymity. Many of them could be compromised and when it came to deciding whether to exercise their right to vote or protect their families’ safety, they would probably choose not to be registered at all. That would be a most unfortunate set of circumstances to have to deal with and I am sure that the House would not want those circumstances to continue. Apart from the special circumstances of prison and police officers in Northern Ireland, some more general circumstances apply throughout the UK—to victims of domestic violence, for example. That provides further evidence of the benefits to be gained from allowing anonymous registration. It would help the people affected to live free from the fear of attack. Any scheme would have to be devised with the main aim of protecting the vulnerable without allowing anyone to benefit from not being on the register. Such a balance will always be difficult to strike, but that difficulty cannot be allowed to stand as an argument against the principle of anonymous registration. When the Electoral Administration Bill was passing through the House, the official Opposition sought to table a probing amendment. Its main principle—that access to anonymous registration should be for those who are at risk rather than those who seek privacy—would be generally accepted by the House. It is important to back up the case for being at risk with suitable documentation from the police or other statutory bodies. On that basis, I believe that the House could be content that the right people had access to the anonymous registration list. All such cases are to be regarded as exceptional rather than usual. Adopting the telephone directory analogy, it should not be as easy to get off the register as to go ex-directory. I hope that, in framing the provisions, the Government will take into account the issue of risk rather than convenience or privacy. The electoral register plays an important role and must be as complete as possible: it should not be changed on account of privacy, but only by reference to safety. Unfortunately, due to the bad drafting of clause 1, it is impossible to make an assessment of how the arrangements will work in practice. We support the principle of anonymous registration, however, so we continue to support the Bill, but we trust that our business will be dealt with in a more appropriate manner in due course.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
445 c135-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Fraud Elections Ministerial powers Northern Ireland Public appointments Public interest Political parties Registration Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland
Legislation
Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk