HC Deb 25 July 1950 vol 478 cc368-83

10.0 p.m.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Ede)

I beg to move, That the Representation of the People Regulations, 1950, dated 5th July, 1950, a copy of which was laid before this House on 6th July, be approved. This Motion deals with the revised Regulations under the Representation of the People Act. I should like to take the opportunity, in submitting these Regulations to the House, to thank hon. Members on both sides who have submitted to me suggestions for embodiment in the revised Regulations. Because I understand that it is the only thing which would be in order, I propose to deal with the alterations which the new regulations make in the Regulations which were previously in force.

The Representation of the People Act, under which the former Regulations were made, has been consolidated in the Act of 1949, and the Ireland Act, 1949, has also necessitated some verbal amendments. We had one other Measure, which hon. Members who were in the last House will recall, the Electoral Registers Act, 1949, which we introduced as an economy Measure. An amendment to that was moved by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Hornchurch (Mr. Bing) relating to the bringing on to the register of young people who in the first six months of the period of the annual register attained the qualifying age. Regulation 5 (3) of the revised Regulations provides that the names of such persons shall be marked with the letter "Y" so that they will be entitled to vote at any election that occurs in the second half of the year to which the register relates.

The 1949 Regulations contained a number of transitional provisions which have been deleted because they are no longer applicable. Apart from these amendments necessitated by legislation, some amendments of substance have been made in the light of experience since the 1949 Regulations were made in February of last year. Regulations 11 and 12 set out the procedure for dealing with claims to be included in the register of electors. Such a claim may be made either by an elector or by some other person on his behalf. The 1949 Regulations provided that certain notices required to be given by the registration officer should be sent to the claimant. In some cases the claimant may be a soldier serving abroad, and the Regulations have been amended to provide that notices shall be sent to the person making the claim, who may not necessarily be the claimant.

Regulation 23 has been amended to give the Secretary of State a power which may be necessary in cases where he gives a direction under Section 11 (4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1949. Under that Section an interested local authority or 30 electors may make representations to the Secretary of State that the responsible local authority has not exercised its power under the Section with regard to the polling districts in its area so as to meet the reasonable requirements of the electors.

Prior to the General Election I received a number of representations from different constituencies, local authorities and groups of electors with regard to this matter. Some I was able to grant, but it seemed to me in some instances that the case was not made out. I anticipate that these applications will continue to come in. When I receive them, if I accept the representations that are made, I may thereupon direct the local authority to alter the polling district arrangements. The revised arrangements may not be capable of being put into effect imme- diately, however, without a corresponding adaptation of the current register of electors. But in the old regulations I had no power to direct that the register should be so adapted, and sometimes a rather "sticky" clerk of a local authority would say, "Even if you make the alterations I shall not be able to adapt the register in time for the election." The amended regulations enable me to direct that the register shall be adapted so that the alteration can be brought into force at once.

Regulations 25, 30 and 32 deal with the procedure in connection with applications to vote by post or by proxy. The 1949 regulations provided that an application to be treated as an absent voter or to appoint a proxy might be disregarded for the purposes of a particular election if received after a specified day. In the case of applications for an indefinite period on the ground, for example, of physical disability, nature of occupation or change of address, this day was the day on which the writ for the election was received. In the case of applications for the purpose of a particular election, for example, by Service voters or election officials, it was two days before the last day for nominations, but in either case the previous regulations gave the registration officer discretion to deal with applications received after that day.

At the recent General Election, therefore, the actual last day for receipt of applications varied from constituency to constituency at the discretion of the registration officer, and this caused confusion and discontent. I had representations made to me that in some constituencies one party knew that applications could still be received, but other parties did not, and there was very considerable dissatisfaction in a great many constituencies with regard to the matter. It seems preferable that the closing day should be the same for all types of applications and should not be subject to variation; and also that it should be later than some of the dates hitherto allowed.

The new regulations provide that applications received by the registration officer after the last day for the delivery of nomination papers, which in the view of the Advisory Electoral Conference is the latest date which can safely be appointed, shall be disregarded for the purposes of the election. The registration officer retains the discretion to allow late applications by election officers and police constables, and late applications to be no longer treated as an absent voter or for the cancellation of proxy appointments. I think the House will agree that that is a reasonable regulation to make.

Of course, the actual election officials who may be appointed to a polling place other than their own, or police constables appointed for duty during the day of polling at some polling station other than the one at which they may be on the register, very often do not know they are to be assigned for duty until a very short time indeed before the date of the poll. The returning officer is in reasonably close touch with such persons. For others the last day will be the day of nomination and that will give the registration officer and the returning officer ample opportunity to see that all the persons who have claimed within the appointed time have an opportunity to record their vote.

Regulations 26, 33 and 41 (2) have been amended to simplify the preparation of the absent voters' list and the postal proxies' list. The 1949 regulations provided that the names in those lists should be numbered consecutively and that these numbers should be marked on the counterfoils of the ballot papers issued. The new regulations provide the elector's number in the register, which in any event must be included in the lists, shall be used instead. This enables consecutive numbering of the lists to be dispensed with, and in the hurry of the last two or three days that, of course, represents a considerable saving in the office of the registration officer.

Regulation 28 has been revised to provide that where an application for the appointment of a proxy is received after an election has begun and on or before the last day for nominations, no inquiry need be sent to the person nominated as second choice for proxy, failing the first choice, until after the date of the poll. This is a consequential amendment to the amendment to regulation 30 already referred to, which alters the last date for the receipt of applications for the appointment of a proxy from the opening day of the election to the last day for the receipt of nomination papers.

Where as a consequence it is necesary to deal with applications received after the election has begun, there will not be time to make the necessary inquiry of the second nomination for proxy before the appointment has to be made, and the amendment relieves the registration officer of having to make an inquiry during an election which could not result in an appointment effective for that election. Usually, of course, the first choice is willing to act and the appointment can be made effective for the election.

Regulation 48 deals with the procedure for the opening of the postal voters' ballot boxes. At the last election there were numerous complaints as to the delay that occurred on the day of the count, and I have ascertained that in a fair number of cases that was due to the slow procedure of dealing with the postal voters' ballot boxes. One thing that will help in future is that the Treasury have made a further grant for the employment of additional counting assistants. This is not a matter that really comes into these regulations but it will help considerably in the count and will, I hope, leave the returning officer with one or two people at least who will be able to deal with the postal voters' boxes during the actual process of the poll.

Postal votes may be received at any time up to the close of the poll and, therefore, at least one box must remain unopened until then. The new regulation, however, removes any doubt as to whether other boxes may be opened before the close of the poll. The regulation is only concerned with the opening of the envelopes and checking that the contents are in order. The ballot papers are not counted at this stage but are placed in a ballot box to be mixed with and counted with the ordinary ballot papers at the count.

Brigadier Prior-Palmer (Worthing)

Will the second envelope be opened or will it be put in the ballot box?

Mr. Ede

Both envelopes will be opened. The ballot paper will be checked and it will be put into a ballot box in preparation for being mixed with the ordinary ballot papers when they have all been checked and the time for counting comes.

I am quite sure the House will accept the view that this should result in a considerable saving of time in those cases particularly where the counting of votes is done on the evening of polling day, although I think that some of the longer counts were those that took place on the day after polling day. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Apparently there have been some victims. Even in those cases, it should enable this long and rather tedious business to be dealt with in sufficient time for these papers to be ready to be counted when the others are ready.

Regulation 62 has been amended by increasing the period allowed for giving notice of an appeal against a registration officer's decision from five days to 14. A recent case suggested that the time previously allowed was unsatisfactory. Several of the forms prescribed in the First Schedule have been amended in the light of experience. During the Adjournment Debate on Election arrangements on 31st March there was some criticism of the wording of Form C which is the prescribed form of announcement to be issued by electoral registration officers when electoral lists are published. The form has been much shortened and simplified. Form H, the form of the certificate of identity to be used by postal voters, has also been simplified.

Form Q, which is used for applications to be treated as an absent voter on the grounds of occupation or physical disability, has been amended to secure that a person who is registered as a blind person by a local authority need not obtain a medical certificate as to his blindness for the purpose of his application. This form was previously also the form to be used by persons applying on the ground that they would be unable to go to the poll from their qualifying address without making a journey by air or sea. To secure greater clarity a separate form has been supplied for applications on those grounds. These are alterations that these new Regulations have made in the Regulations that were in force at the General Election.

I should like to express my thanks, not merely to those who sent me suggestions with regard to these matters, but also to the advisory committee which helps me on these matters whose care and attention have been beyond all praise. On it are represented the national agents of the three main political parties, the registration officers and those who are concerned in one way or another with the conduct of an election. Their advice has been wise. I regret that it has not been possible to make all the alterations I would have liked, but I believe that these Regulations represent a substantial advance on those which were in force at the General Election of this year.

10.18 p.m.

Mr. R. V. Grimston (Westbury)

The Home Secretary has given us a full explanation of the amendments which these Regulations contain as compared with those in force at the General Election. I understand that they have come, in the main, from the deliberations which took place at the electoral conference when the experience of the General Election was discussed; and, as far as they go, it appears to us, as the Home Secretary has said, that they are an improvement on what was in force at the time of the General Election.

There are, however, one or two comments I would like to make on them, first, in regard to the alterations to Regulations 25, 30 and 32 which substitute a fixed day for the acceptance of applications for proxy and postal voting for the discretion which was originally held by the returning officer. I understand, and the Home Secretary referred to it, that in some constituencies the last day, as arrived at by the discretion of the returning officer, was some days after nomination day.

I think the longer the period can be extended the better because there must be a number of people who, for one reason or another, are faced by the fact that they cannot get to the poll. I am wondering whether nomination day is administratively possible and whether "D" day, so to speak, could not be made later. Otherwise I agree with the Home Secretary that it is better to have a universal practice rather than a practice which differs from constituency to constituency. Perhaps the Home Secretary would look at that point.

I should like to raise a point with regard to the issue of postal ballot papers. The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that by Regulation 40 there can now be more than one issue of these postal ballot papers. In the case of the first issue the returning officer is bound to give two days notice in writing at least of his intention to issue postal ballot papers. That gives the candidate or his agent time to make arrangements to be present. In the case of a subsequent postal issue the returning officer has only to notify each candidate "as soon as practicable." I wonder how that may work out in practice, because "practicable" may mean a very short period and it may well be that the candidate or his agent will be faced with a notice from a returning officer that the issue is to be made at a time at which it is impossible to arrange proper representation. That is a point which should be looked at to see if a mandatory period should not be laid down for second or subsequent issues of postal ballot papers.

I have no comment to make about the opening of ballot boxes. Anything that helps towards speediness of the count is probably agreeable to everyone, provided that what is done is watertight, which, from the explanation of the Home Secretary, I think is the case. What we are more interested in is what the Home Secretary has not introduced into these Regulations.

Mr. Speaker

We cannot discuss that.

Mr. Grimston

I do not know whether one is allowed to ask a question about them so that the Home Secretary might be able to give briefly the reason why he has not been able to introduce them.

Mr. Speaker

I think not. Debate is limited to the Regulations and what is in the Regulations. We cannot go outside them, not even to ask what is left out.

Mr. Grimston

In view of your Ruling, Sir, I cannot pursue that point. We shall have to seek other opportunities of raising these matters. I understand that in the case of some the Home Secretary would have been ready to give his reasons for their omission.

We believe that these amended Regulations are, on the whole, an improvement. I hope that the Home Secretary may be able to deal with the two points which I have raised, and that he will also be prepared to give consideration to bringing forward more amendments to embody some of the things which we should like to see done.

10.24 p.m.

Mr. Keeling (Twickenham)

At the Election a great many people qualified to vote were bitterly disappointed to find that they were not on the Register. As the Home Secretary has said, a con- ference took place at the Home Office, attended by representatives of the parties, to see whether the arrangements for registration could be improved. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Westbury (Mr. R. V. Grimston) in finding the changes in the Regulations, which are the result of that conference, rather trifling. The Home Secretary made the most of them in his speech, but that most is not much. The mountains in labour have produced a rather small mouse. As you have reminded us, Mr. Speaker, it is not in order to discuss what is not in these Regulations, but I may perhaps be permitted to record regret that some of the recommendations of that Home Office conference have not been embodied in them.

In the Debate on 31st March a suggestion was made by myself, and endorsed by other hon. Members, that this conference should issue a report stating what were its conclusions, and what were its reasons for making certain recommendations and not others. It would have been convenient to have such a comprehensive statement but, because there has not been one, some of my hon. Friends and myself have put down a large number of questions to the Home Secretary for Thursday on the omissions from these regulations. I do not think that is a convenient course, but it is the only one open to us.

I may perhaps draw attention to a misinterpretation of these Regulations during the election by the Minister of Health. In Twickenham, I think it was actually on polling day, a man stopped me in the street and complained that his wife, who was at that moment having a baby in hospital, had not been allowed to exercise the postal vote. On inquiry I found that the Minister of Health had issued instructions that the medical certificate to enable a hospital patient to apply for a postal vote could not be issued until she was actually in hospital, although for some weeks before going into hospital she had been an outpatient. When she applied, it was too late. That was a serious case of disenfranchisement by ministerial action, and I am glad to say that it was not the action of the Home Secretary.

There is one point in these Regulations to which I draw the attention of the House. On page 42 will be found Form R—"Application to be treated as an absent voter owing to change of residence." It was ruled, I do not know by whom, that if the change of residence consisted of forcible removal to one of His Majesty's prisons, the prisoner could apply to vote by post.

Now look, if you will, Mr. Speaker, at Note 3 which says: This application cannot be allowed if the address at which you now reside is in the same area as the address for which you are registered, i.e., within the borough. … That means that if the prison is in the same area as the address at which the prisoner lived before he was taken to gaol, he cannot vote by post. I understand that actually happened in the constituency of the hon. Member who is now the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. de Freitas), and his constituent was unjustly disenfranchised for that reason. Surely this is conferring an unfair advantage on prisoners who are taken to prison in some different area? What will the Home Secretary do to redress this burning injustice to people who go to gaol in their own borough? Will he arrange that such prisoners—and there must be quite a few of them—shall be taken from prison in charge of a warder to the polling station so that they can exercise the franchise to which they are said to be entitled but of which they are deprived for this unreasonable cause? After all, the man who goes to gaol has no choice as to whether he goes to gaol in his own borough or in some other. But perhaps it would be simpler to abolish the ridiculous ruling that a prisoner can vote by post.

10.29 p.m.

Captain Duncan (South Angus)

I do not disagree with the Regulations, but I have one small point to make which I have not made hitherto for the obvious reason which will follow. It has been brought to my notice in Scotland—I raise it with the Home Secretary because it is of general application—that many electors do not see if their names are on the register because it is divided up into classes A, B and C and they get muddled. They look at register A find they are not on it, and then the electoral registration officer has a lot of trouble to find out whether they are on one of the other lists.

When the new electoral register comes out next year, will it be clearly publicised, in print rather than by broadcast, that voters should look not only at the "A" part of the register, but at the other parts, too. I say that this ought not to be broadcast. If the right hon. Gentleman broadcasts, people may not listen to him. But if it is published in official announcements in large type, the voters are sure to notice it, and will not worry the election registration officer as in the past.

Mr. Douglas Marshall (Bodmin)

The problem of the absent voter affects the large rural areas, and I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he would ensure that any publicity he considers giving in the Press to these alterations is given not only in the national papers but also in the weekly newspapers.

10.31 p.m.

Sir Herbert Williams (Croydon, South)

You may remember, Mr. Speaker, that under your chairmanship I took an active part in the 1944 Conference, and on that occasion I think more than anyone else I urged the necessity of extending the principle of the absent vote. I did not get all the support I desired on that principle. I think that on democratic grounds we should make it as easy as possible for people to exercise the franchise.

I should like to refer to the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Mr. Keeling), who has drawn attention to page 42 of this document. It says: Temporary absence, e.g., on holiday"— that is only by way of example— does not constitute a change of residence. I do not know how long you have to be under the Home Secretary's jurisdiction to be regarded as "temporary." I suppose if you get a fortnight for being drunk and disorderly, that would be regarded as temporary.

Mr. Ede

I do not suggest that Mr. Speaker should get any sentence at all.

Sir H. Williams

I must apologise. We get into the bad habit of saying "you" when we mean "somebody." You have to carry many burdens, Mr. Speaker.

What I have quoted is one of the definite statements contained in this document. I think it is monstrous that people who go away for a holiday should be deprived of their vote. They may have made their holiday arrangements a long time before, especially as we are now asking for staggered holidays. Why an absence on holiday should be regarded as a disqualification from voting by post I cannot see. I have always been a strong advocate of voting by post. Only once in my life have I voted personally in an election. I discovered that the qualification of being a Parliamentary candidate was accepted by most registration officers, and it is now recognised by Statute, as qualifying one as an absent voter. Only in the election of 1945 did I vote in person. [AN HON. MEMBER: "Was that why the hon. Gentleman lost?"] I did not vote for myself but for somebody else.

Hon. Members opposite talk about being democratic. We should make it easier and not more difficult to vote. I have put forward proposals, which were not accepted, that we should have our polling on Sundays, as they do in a great many countries, from two to six o'clock, with no motor cars and no committee rooms, and everything done in decency. I got no support from anyone, but I still think there is a lot to be said for these proposals. Why should temporary absence on holiday not constitute a change of residence? I think this is a fundamental defect in this document. I hope that the Home Secretary will take note of the observations I have made. I am only repeating in this House things which I said in your presence, Mr. Speaker, in the Committee Room upstairs six years ago.

10.35 p.m.

Mr. Ede

The hon. Member for West-bury (Mr. R. V. Grimston) referred to the question of making nomination day the last day for receiving applications for postal voting. That was very carefully considered by the agents and other people, and they came to the conclusion that when one has made allowance for the way in which these votes have to be packed and sent out, it would be impossible to guarantee that the vote would reach the voter in time to be returned if any later date were fixed. I am bound to say that I share that view, and I think that the expert advice which we received on that occasion was sound.

The hon. Member asked a question, also, with regard to Regulation 40. I am bound to say that that is in the same form as it has always been. There is no alteration in that, and therefore I think I should be out of order if I attempted to explain it. But I think it is reasonable that if a second issue of ballot papers has to be made, for any reason, if they cannot all be got out on the first day it would be rather foolish for the returning officer to hold up for two days before he issued the remainder. I think the reasonable thing would be for him to say, "As it is closing time tonight, we shall start again at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning." I think that ought to be sufficient

The hon. Member for Twickenham (Mr. Keeling) raised the question of the accident which occurred in his constituency, whereby a woman was prevented from getting a postal vote owing to what, he said, was a ruling of the Minister of Health. It was not so. It was a ruling of the hospital board. Instructions have been issued by my right hon. Friend to hospital boards which should ensure that such a mistake will not be made in any future election.

Mr. Keeling

The mere fact that fresh instructions had to be issued shows that the Minister's original instruction was, to say the least, very obscure.

Mr. Ede

I do not think the hon. Member has any evidence with regard to that.

Mr. Keeling

Yes, I have.

Mr. Ede

I think the effective thing is that steps have been taken to remedy whatever the cause was which led to the mistake, which I am quite sure everyone regrets.

Mr. Messer (Tottenham)

No doctor will issue a certificate without first seeing the patient.

Mr. Ede

I had a case in my constituency, and the doctor who was attending the lady gave the necessary certificate. There are generally more ways than one of dealing with these questions. The hon. Member alluded to the question of prisoners receiving votes which, I think, is in some measure in contrast with the case of the hon. Member for Croydon, East (Sir H. Williams), namely, the person who is on holiday. I am not at all sure that there is much justification for including prisoners at all.

I am not at all sure that one of the penalties of imprisonment ought not to be the temporary withdrawal of this form of civic right. That is a matter to which I will give consideration, though I am not sure that it is not rather difficult to say that if a man who has been found guilty of being drunk, and fined 10s. with the option of seven days' imprisonment, elects to do the seven days in prison, he should be in a position to vote—I think that he would want about 14 days to be able to do it—while a man who has genuinely gone on his holidays should be debarred.

Mr. Manningham-Buller (Northants, South)

The right hon. Gentleman, when dealing with prisoners, is referring only to those who have been sentenced, and not to those in custody on remand?

Mr. Ede

Yes, Sir. Every man in this country on remand is regarded as innocent by everyone except the lawyer defending him. It would depend on the length of the remand, or where he was. I will take that into account, if I have to deal with this class of persons only, although I think that I am debarred by the Act from giving a postal vote to anyone except one who is outside the particular area in which he can be registered. I think I should be debarred from dealing with the gentleman who was deprived from voting for my hon. Friend and thereby giving him an absolute majority in his constituency.

Mr. Keeling

If this requires legislation, may I ask for an assurance that, so long as the law is what it is, namely, that a man who goes to prison in his own area is disfranchised and a man who is in prison in another area gets a vote, the right hon. Gentleman will arrange for the first man to be marched to the booth in charge of a warder?

Mr. Ede

I am not going to give any such ridiculous assurance as that.

Mr. Keeling

It would only be fair.

Mr. Ede

The hon. and gallant Member for South Angus (Captain Duncan), who used to represent North Kensington, by which name I know him rather better—when he was a Conservative pure and undefiled—raised an issue with which I cannot deal as I would like, because it is one of the alterations I shall have to make; but I am giving particular attention to the amount of publicity that can be given. The widest publicity will be given. I also note the point made by the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. D. Marshall), and will endeavour to meet that.

I am arranging for these lists to be not merely at post offices, but at citizen advice bureaux and such other institutions where, I hope, it may be possible for some person who is there to be able to guide the voter in search for his name. It is one of the disappointments that I have not been able to arrange for a draft register to be published. The hon. Member for Croydon, East (Sir H. Williams) gave us some account of what happened at the conference held some six years ago. I have the greatest difficulty in dealing with holiday-makers. At certain constituencies at certain times holiday-makers might swamp the work of the registration and returning officers in getting ready the election register.

It will be remembered that when we had the election in July, 1945, we were fortunate in having three weeks between the date of the voting and the date of the declaration, but, owing to the Lancashire and Yorkshire wakes, we had to arrange for some of the elections to take place on 12th July instead of on 5th July. My hon. Friend the Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. S. Silverman), who represents two boroughs, one of which had its wakes on the 5th and the other on the 12th, was allowed to have a General Election all by himself on the 19th. In that kind of case, this might overwhelm a returning officer and lead to great dissatisfaction on the part of the electorate. But I am anxious to see that as many people as possible record their votes, and I shall welcome any further suggestions which hon. Members may be able to make; and I assure them that such suggestions will have my serious consideration.

Now I would just refer to this so-called conference. This was a body of people called together by myself to advise me, and it is not usual for the advice tendered in such circumstances to be published. I accept the full responsibility for these new Regulations; they embody some improvements, but not all, that I should like to have made. Given time, I hope that they will be better than previous Regulations which I have brought before the House.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved: That the Representation of the People Regulations, 1950, dated 5th July, 1950, a copy of which was laid before this House on 6th July, be approved.