Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Pannick (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 1 February 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.


Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill

This matter should be decided by pragmatism rather than philosophy. I suggest to the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Stamford, that the contrast between paragraph 9(1) and paragraph 9(2) makes perfect sense. The Electoral Commission has a duty to inform people about the existence of the referendum and about how to vote in it, and so it should. It is given a discretion about whether it attempts to summarise the arguments on both sides. The reason it is given a discretion is because whether and to what extent it should inform people on those controversial matters depends on how much other information people are going to receive on both sides. As has already been said by many noble Lords, it depends on whether it can do that job impartially, which is exceptionally difficult, and it depends on the time constraints.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
724 c1324 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Alternative vote Administration Absent voting Costs Expenditure Electoral Commission Referendums Polling stations Scotland Wales
Legislation
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk