HC Deb 11 December 1968 vol 775 cc496-508

In section 23 of the Representation of the People Act 1949, in subsection 7 the words 'rural district or' shall be left out.—[Mr. Lubbock.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Lubbock

I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.

The Chairman (Mr. Sydney Irving)

With this Clause we will also consider new Clause 9, Amendment of section 23 (7) of the 1949 Act:

Subsection (7) of section 23 of the Representation of the People 9ct, 1949 shall be amended by leaving out the words 'except, in England and Wales, elections of rural district or parish councillors'. standing in the names of the hon. Member for Petersfield (Miss Quennell) and the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ashley), and Amendment No. 76, in Schedule 3, page 33, line 24, at end insert:

8. In section 23 (7) the words from 'except' to the end of the subsection shall be omitted. standing in the name of the hon. Member for Carlisle (Mr. Ron Lewis).

Mr. Lubbock

This Clause enables me to return to a point I made briefly on Second Reading, namely, the difference in treatment, as far as postal votes are concerned, between urban and rural district councils. This arises from Section 23 (7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1949, which states: Postal voting shall be allowed at all local government elections, except, in England and Wales, elections of rural district or parish councillors. On an earlier Amendment, we tried to provide for postal votes to be given to orthodox Jews who were unable to cast a vote in person if an election were held on a Saturday. It was pointed out to me on that occasion that we could only solve that problem as far as urban district councils were concerned because there is no provision in our legislation for a similar right to be extended in rural district council elections.

I therefore hastily put down this Clause so that we might have an opportunity to discuss the matter. It would go wider than enabling orthodox Jews and other minorities to exercise votes on Saturdays or other holy days.

We are discussing whether there should be any distinction between the U.D.C.s and the R.D.C.s, bearing in mind that the responsibilities of these authorities are very much the same, and that people wishing to use a postal vote are more likely to be in spread-out areas than in a closely-knit urban community. Think of the old person who is infirm and consequently needs a postal vote, because she cannot get between her home and the polling station. If she lives in a spread-out rural area she is more likely to need the postal vote than if she lives in the middle of a town governed by a U.D.C. That is the essence of the argument.

I understand that the Rural District Councils' Association has made representations to the Home Office in favour of postal voting being extended to rural elections. I think that there is an argument for the further extension to parish councils too. This is recommended by the Amendment of the hon. Member for Carlisle. The National Association of Parish Councils has written to me pointing out that parish and rural district council elections are always held to gether, so it would be no additional administrative inconvenience if postal votes were conferred in those elections, too.

I would have liked to have had time to go back to the discussions on the Representation of the People Act, 1949, to try to understand why this distinction was made. I have not had the time to do this, but no one with whom I have discussed the matter since it arose can think of any logical reason. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will give as sympathetic reply to this as he did to the last debate.

Mr. Ron Lewis (Carlisle)

I am delighted to follow the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock) and I am hoping to go a little further than he is suggesting in his new Clause. This is a very important matter, dealing with postal and proxy voting. The hon. Gentleman said he could not understand why the 1949 Act was not extended. I may be wrong, but I gather that at that time both the Rural District Councils' Association and the Parish Councils' Association were against that principle. I speak tonight only on behalf of the Rural District Councils' Association, which has come out firmly and strongly in favour of postal and proxy voting being extended into rural and parish areas.

Take the example of a blind man who can become a postal voter in Par liamentary, county council, borough or urban elections, but not in rural or parish council elections. In a rural election, he may have to travel much further to the polling booth than if he lived in the towns. Unsuccessful attempts have been made during the discussions of the Bill to make provisions enabling persons on holiday to vote in Parliamentary elections, but how much greater is the need to correct than anomaly in local elections?

6.45 p.m.

It cannot be right if one class of voter is excluded from rights given to another simply because of the area of the country in which he lives. It may be said that there are administrative difficulties in carrying this out. This has been one of the arguments in the past, the timetable of elections and the printing of ballot papers. As one who lives in a rural district council area, I say that the administrative problems should not be allowed to stand in the way of what must be right, and that is that people living in a rural or parish council area should have the same rights as those living in a county.

Take the case of a father living in the countryside and his daughter-in-law living in the city. It could happen that both were ill at the same time, but the father, because he lived in a rural area, could not vote by post while the daughter-in-law, living in the town, could do so. On 21st November, the Government announced that they intended to introduce legislation to settle the pattern of local areas in Wales. Details produced show an amalgamation of boroughs, urban districts and rural districts into districts. Unless postal voting is with drawn from the former borough and urban districts there has to be an ex tension of postal voting. I hope that this local government apartheid, which has been with us so many years will go. What is fair for the town is equally fair for the parish. I hope that my hon. Friend will meet the wishes of these people.

Miss J. M. Quennell (Petersfield)

I am delighted to support the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock) in his new Clause. I have one on the Notice Paper relating to much the same subject. While he has not had time to go into the history of this case, the Clause which I have tabled is a culmination of a long argument that I have had with the Home Office over many years. The hon. Gentleman became acquainted with this anomaly within our electoral structure as a result of dealing with orthodox Jews, while I became aware of it a year after I entered this House, in 1961, in connection with handicapped persons.

It applies to them just as much. I thought it only fair to give the Under-Secretary fair warning, so in the Second Reading debate I warned him that I would seek to correct a serious omission from the Bill … "—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 18th November 1968; Vol. 733, c. 981.] I noticed when I spoke a look of bewilderment upon his face, and I realised that all those years of correspondence with the Home Office had disappeared into limbo. That was not really surprising. The position arises from Section 23 of the 1949 Act. This was a far-reaching and complex Act, but it was put on the Statute Book 20 years ago, in the light of knowledge and medical experience of that time.

Many war injured people were about, and it was assumed that they would tend to live in towns rather than in the country.

As medical science has progressed and made it possible for handicapped people to take their part in the community, and to be effective taxpayers and ratepayers, they have spread much more widely into the countryside. I cannot say precisely how many handicapped people who are confined to their chairs there are, but there are thousands of them—I would think about 10,000.

Section 23 of the 1949 Act made pro vision for most classes of people eligible for postal and proxy voting. This is why handicapped people and presumably orthodox Jews in urban districts enjoy the facilities of postal and proxy voting, but not those in rural districts. A nation wide apparatus of electoral machinery has been established covering every parish and rural district under the 1949 Act. This is why the anomaly is so ridiculous. Every county division has this apparatus, and, therefore, every parish is covered, but Section 7 of the 1949 Act excludes rural districts. It provides that postal and proxy voting shall be available for all local government elections and then goes on to knock on the head all rural district and parish council elections in England and Wales. I am not brave enough to trespass into the Kingdom of Scotland. I leave that to Scottish Members and the bravery of the Home Office.

The effect on handicapped people is that they can cast their vote at Parliamentary elections because they have access to the postal or proxy facilities as rate payers. But they cannot cast their vote at district council elections, not because they are statutorily barred or because they are criminals or lunatics, but simply and solely because they are crippled. I do not believe that any hon. Member would willingly accede to the continuance of this state of affairs.

Between 1961 and 1964 I received a number of letters from the Home Office to the effect that when the legislative opportunity occurred this anomaly would be borne in mind. In 1965, we had Mr. Speaker's Conference and the appointment of the Advisory Committee to the Home Office, and their recommendations have been incorporated in the Bill. But, unfortunately, there is no provision in the Bill to correct this unjustifiable anomaly which denies a small group of people, who are perfectly good taxpayers and ratepayers, the same rights in a democracy which others enjoy.

Let me try to visualise the arguments which would be adduced against this proposal. In.949, the Rural District Councils' Association and the Parish Councils Association were a little afraid. The 1949 Act was far-reaching and they were not sure how the new machinery would operate. There was fear of undue expense and undue complications. But the mere fact that the postal and proxy facilities were established so widely under Section 23 of the 1949 Act, and because they exist in respect of every county division and therefore in respect of practicaly every parish, the polling station apparatus is in existence. This new Clause would simply enable the use of the existing apparatus The additional cost must be marginal. There could be no consequent expense from the Clause in connection simply with proxy voting.

There is one other point which we should bear in mind. A Royal Commission is currently considering the whole structure of local government. It is not unlikely that it will make recommendations which would radically alter the structure. It is possible that district councils will assume far greater importance than they possess now. It would be intolerable if the denial of the full franchise to a small minority of citizens were to be extended.

Mr. Onslow

You may remember, Mr. Irving, that I was once a member of the Dartford Rural District Council. I came across this ridiculous anomaly when I first stood for election. I never under stood it. It caused much resentment among the electors. On behalf of the people whom I used to represent, and whom you now represent, Mr. Irving, I strongly support the new Clause.

Mr. Sharples

I support the new Clause. There is broad agreement in the Committee that the law as it stands is wrong and that a change should be made either on the lines proposed in the Clause or by going even further and taking in parish councils as proposed in the Amendments put forward by other hon. Members.

My hon. Friend the Member for Petersfield (Miss Quennell) speaks with great knowledge of this subject. I am one of her constituents. She represents a constituency covering a very large number of rural district councils. We should pay careful attention to what she has said. One important point which she raised concerns the outcome of the Royal Commission and the effects which that will have on the pattern of local government. As she rightly said, a number of people are prevented from exercising the right to vote enjoyed by others because they live in areas covered by rural district councils.

The hon. Member for Carlisle (Mr. Ron Lewis) rightly said that administrative difficulties were likely to be advanced against implementing the change proposed in the new Clause. He said that administrative considerations should not be allowed to stand in the way of a principle if that principle was right. I support his view. I believe that there is general support for it.

I appreciate that there may be very considerable administrative difficulties, but I do not believe that they are insuperable. I hope very much that when the Under-Secretary replies he will tell the Committee that it is his intention to get over those difficulties and to find a way round them if that can possibly be done.

7.0 p.m.

Mr. Merlyn Rees

We are considering two new Clauses and another Amendment. The object of the first new Clause is to extend postal voting to rural district council elections. The second new Clause would extend it to rural district and parish council elections. There is one odd quirk—one learns all the time—and I think that the point may have been omitted by accident, but there are a few rural borough council elections; there are such cases, and I see that hon. Gentle men are as surprised as I was to learn that.

The object of the Amendment is to ex tend postal voting to all local government elections at which it is not allowed at present, that is, rural district, rural borough, and parish council elections. My hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Mr. Ron Lewis), by his Amendment, covered the point which the second new Clause missed out—that is, that of the rural boroughs.

The hon. Lady the Member for Peters-field (Miss Quennell) said quite correctly that she had been in touch with the Home Office over the years. I have her correspondence here. I had always thought, in my innocence, that one never saw correspondence with the previous Administration. However, I imagine this is not exactly the 50-year rule, or anything like that. I have looked at it, and it shows that she has stuck to her last over the years.

The situation now is that under Section 23 of the Representation of the People Act, 1949, as amended, there are postal votes for all local government elections except rural district, rural borough, or parish council elections. The rural boroughs are a few former municipal boroughs of great antiquity which managed, I think before 1957, to get this type of organisation. Postal votes arose for the first time after the last war. They were a new venture. We have had discussions in recent weeks about how far they should spread. I accept straight away that we are not on that argument, and that there are strong views one way and the other. The argument now is that for certain local government elections, citizens who would have the right to vote in other local government elections do not get that right in those particular local government elections. I accept straight away that this is more than an anomaly, that it is something which must be put right.

In 1946, the Oliver Committee on Electoral Registration looked at the whole matter and one phrase in its Report illustrates the difficulties which were seen then. The Committee said, in connection with postal votes in all local government elections: We accordingly recommend that so far as practicable provision should be made for postal voting. … It is the phrase "so far as practicable" which has to be borne in mind. The question of postal voting facilities in the rural district councils, and so on—though I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle has argued about it today—turned on the question whether it was practicable.

Since that time there has been one change. Since 1956, parish council elections, by Statute—my hon. Friend will corect me if I am wrong—are held at the same time as rural district council elections. This is something which one has to bear in mind. This means that there are certainly two elections, although for different types of authority, taking place at the same time.

Mr. Ron Lewis

Yes, but surely the difficulty can be got over with postal voting—by having different coloured ballot papers?

Mr. Rees

I am not arguing that this cannot be overcome and I am not pressing it too far. However, there are problems which I have to consider in deciding what attitude to take.

The returning officer for a combined rural district, rural borough and parish council elections is the clerk to the rural district council. In many cases he is responsible for a large number of parishes with long lists of candidates in the parish council elections as well as in the rural district council election.

Again, I do not say that administrative difficulties should not be overcome to meet a principle, but I am advised that it is difficult for the necessary work to be done in time after the close of nominations and that if postal voting were introduced it would be for the electoral registration officer to see that special lists for postal voting in each parish were prepared. But the returning officer would have to have the ballot papers ready about a week earlier. There are, therefore, complications and difficulties. What I want to do is to find a way to overcome these difficulties in elections at that level—I do not mean that these elections are unimportant, rather that they are different from Parliamentary and urban district council elections.

The real problem is not registration. The hon. Lady made this clear. Registration is relatively a simply matter, in the sense that the machinery is there—for the Parliamentary elections. There is a problem of machinery, however, in relation to the work of the returning officers in widespread areas. All of us know that on the returning officer there are put certain duties at the Parliamentary election level.

We all of us as candidates have a right to see the opening of the votes and to be at the counting of the postal votes. This is not something I have done very often, certainly not recently, because postal vote openings do not on the whole give my party any indication of what the result will be. However, one is allowed to go along and have a look at the votes being opened and one can get some indication of what is going on. As I have said, there is a problem of the mechanism for dealing with the postal votes in rural district council and parish council elections, and this is why postal votes were not allowed in those fields 20 years ago.

I would very much like to help. I have tried to be as helpful as possible with other Amendments and new Clauses this afternoon, but in this instance I advise very strongly that, when we are dealing with people's voting, putting crosses on bits of paper, we must be sure that the mechanism and arrangements for doing that are impeccable. This is not some thing one considers lightly. It is not a question of administrative difficulty in the normal sense of the term—that is not an argument which one would press too far—but there are administrative difficulties when one talks of spreading postal voting to other fields. In Parliamentary elections, at least, the mechanism is there. One can talk of overloading, and so on, but what I am now arguing is that the mechanism for dealing with rural district and parish council elections in preparing lists, and so on, is not such that I could recommend that this Clause be accepted.

I thought for a moment during the debate about proxy voting which my hon. Friend and the hon. Lady mentioned, and the problem of the disabled. One has to bear in mind that the proxy vote is for the Service voter. The point is that if one says that we will have proxy voting for one class, however desirable it may be for that class, it then becomes necessary to take into account the arguments which will be put by other people, and I do not think that it would be right, for just one group, to open up a completely new avenue.

We must make sure that the right given to all those who are entitled to postal votes in Parliamentary elections is also given for rural district and parish council elections, but I think that it would be wrong to erect yet another special class. The hon. Lady in saying that local government reform would not be very helpful in this respect was countering an argument which I had in mind.

I want to do something about this, and would have done so, had I been able to tell the Committee that I was satisfied with the machinery of dealing with postal votes—it is not a question of the machinery for registration. I have spent some time discussing this matter with interested people and, much as I started out wanting to help, I cannot recommend the new Clause and Amendments to the House.

Local government will change. I know that the hon. Lady has heard this argument in a different form since 1961. On that occasion, it was said that the time would come when this matter could be dealt with, meaning now; but it is not being dealt with now. The time will come in local government reform when the machinery for looking after postal votes can be applied universally. I am not saying that there are not rural district and parish councils that could do it now, but, in general, I do not believe that there could be the certainty about the organisation that would enable it to be done.

As the hon. Lady pointed out, it is done in county council elections. The machinery in county council elections is such that I am satisfied that the rules of electoral law that have been built up can be properly carried out in every place.

Mr. Ron Lewis

Surely that applies to the rural district councils? Is my hon. Friend saying that we have not the intelligence in the rural district councils to be able to carry it out honestly?

Mr. Rees

No, I am certainly not saying "intelligence", by a long chalk. I am saying that in terms of the returning officer having the machinery for dealing with it, the postal voting facility is not something which can be spread lightly. At county council elections, in the nature of things, it can be done. I do not want to offend anybody, and I have been seeking the right words all along the line.

Had I felt that there was a way of dealing with this, I would have done so, because I want to. We will look at this most carefully. The intention of my right hon. Friend is that the rights now avail able in local government elections at urban and county council level will also be applicable to parish and rural district councils.

Miss Quennell

I am puzzled by the Under-Secretary's argument. At a county council election or a General Election the clerk of the rural district council is appointed by the county returning officer to act and he conducts the proceedings perfectly well. I do not under stand why he should now be supposed not to be able to do so.

Mr. Rees

The hon. Lady is absolutely right; the clerk of the county council handles these elections. I am the last to cast a reflection on anyone, but I advise the Committee that the machinery for dealing, not with registration, but with postal votes, and so on, is something which I would like to be happier about, so that elections can be carried out in the way we expect. As the hon. Lady has pointed out, it is done in this way at county council elections. I am not criticising anyone for his personal integrity, or for what he is doing.

Mr. Onslow

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that if an authority is fit to levy a rate it ought to be able to administer a postal vote, and that is all there is to it?

Mr. Rees

I want to be sure that the postal voting arrangements can be carried out. I will look at this again, but not in the light of Report. Much as I want to help on this, I am satisfied that I cannot. When local government reform comes about, which will be very soon, we will look again at the matter.

7.15 p.m.

Mr. Lubbock

I cannot pretend that I am entirely happy with the hon. Gentle man's reply, and, I think, neither is he. We are grateful that he has agreed with the principle of new Clauses 8 and 9 and Amendment No. 76, and that he has accepted that, in theory, one cannot argue against the principle on the basis that a person given a democratic right for one type of local authority should have the same right for another.

I am not sure that I understand the hon. Gentleman's explanation of the administrative difficulties, but I am satisfied that he has looked into the matter thoroughly. I am sure that he would not be taking the view which he puts before the House without having gone into the matter with extreme care and attention.

Unhappy as I am about the conclusion which we will have to reach, I will accept his undertaking that the matter will be looked at again after the Royal Commission on Local Government has reported and the structure of local government is recast. I think that we have on the record a positive under taking from him that the same machinery will be applied throughout the whole country when the recommendations of the Royal Commission are implemented. In view of that undertaking I beg leave to withdraw the Motion.

Motion and Clause, by leave, with drawn.

Forward to