HC Deb 22 June 1916 vol 83 cc329-30
45. Mr. W. THORNE

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the Parliamentary Election Expenses (Returning Officers) Acts, 1875 and 1885, provide no real security to returning officers that their expenses will be met; that after nomination they must arithmetically divide the deposit demanded between the number of persons nominated; that in any constituency, by the device of nominating several candidates who after nomination will make no effort to provide their allotted portion of the deposit demanded, tout will permit themselves to be retired, any returning officer may be left in such a position that he has not funds sufficient to conduct the election; and what steps he proposes to take to safeguard the position of returning officers?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir George Cave)

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. I am aware of the provisions contained in the Acts referred to, but it does not appear that any returning officer has yet complained that his position is not sufficiently safeguarded. The matter will no doubt be considered in connection with the wider question of incidence of the returning officers' expenses.

46. Mr. THORNE

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that previous to 1875 no returning officer at a Parliamentary election was entitled to demand a deposit on account of official election expenses from any candidate nominated at a Parliamentary election; that the Returning Officers' Election Expenses Act, 1875, was passed for six years only on the understanding that these expenses should become a public charge, but was afterwards made permanent; and whether he can state if this grievance is to be remedied before the next General Election?

Sir G. CAVE

The statement in the first part of the question is believed to be correct. The Parliamentary Elections (Returning Officers) Act, 1875, was limited to expire on the 31st December, 1880, but on reference to the Debates which took place on the passing of the Act of 1875 it does not appear that there was any such understanding as is referred to in the question. The Act has not been made permanent, but has been continued from year to year under the Expiring Laws Continuance Acts. The whole question will, no doubt, receive consideration at an early date.