PILOT SCHEMES

HC Deb 20 January 2000 vol 342 cc1018-30

Mr. Evans

I beg to move amendment No. 28, page 12, line 4, at end insert— '(2A) Where a scheme makes provision for voting to take place on more than one day, any order under subsection (1) above shall include provisions that prohibit the publication of such material as may be specified that indicates or purports to indicate the way in which two or more persons voting prior to the day of the poll (or, if more than one day is designated as a day of the poll, to the last day so designated) have cast their votes.'. We return now to the problem of polling. As the Minister has already accepted that the problem exists, I do not intend to dwell on it.

If polling is extended over more than one day, a problem arises with exit polling. Under pilot schemes, a constituency may want to trial the opening of an early box in the town hall. Opening all polling stations would involve prohibitive costs—possibly thousands of pounds—for a constituency. I suspect that there may be an official polling day, but that a box will be opened early in the town hall in one or two places in a constituency, so that people will be able to cast their votes early.

If the early polling were concentrated in just one or two stations, it would be easier for polling organisations to man those areas. I am referring not to polling people as to how they may vote—the predictive element—but as to how they have voted. That means that the poll is more realistic, although we know that that is not always the case. I am happy to say that in the 1992 general election the exit polling was completely wrong.

Exit polls may sway people in their vote. Some will go along with the trend, but if the exit poll shows that one party might gain a large majority, some may be dissuaded from even taking part in the poll. Although such trends and behaviour may disadvantage one party at the moment, that situation will alter in future.

This is not rocket science. Such provisions already exist in other countries. To save time in Committee. I decided not to read out the full list of those countries and I shall not do so now. However, I know that the Minister is aware that the legislation in some countries bans exit polling once voting has already started. In some countries, such polls are banned even in the few days before the election takes place. We are not asking for that. We are merely suggesting that, if voting has begun in the pilot area, polling must not be allowed to take place.

In France, voting takes place over two Sundays. That means that there is no polling for two weeks during general election campaigns. Although such provisions are not part of the legislation in the United States, because of the time-zone problem, appeals are made to people on the east coast not to declare their results before people on the west coast have voted.

The Minister gave us an assurance in Committee. I hope that he will he able to reassure us once again that the matter will be considered carefully when the Bill goes to another place. Perhaps a Government amendment will be tabled. Such an amendment is necessary because local authorities in a pilot would not have the power individually to ban exit polling. The matter needs to be considered here and a provision must appear in the Bill.

Mr. Mike Hancock (Portsmouth, South)

On this occasion, Liberal Democrats will support the official Opposition. The hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) made it clear that there are several good reasons for the amendment.

I have some experience of what can happen when an exit poll is conducted in a city such as Portsmouth. The newspaper there publishes a lunchtime edition followed by several later editions. An exit poll of early polling between 6 and 8 am could easily be in the public domain by lunchtime. I know for a fact that a newspaper can have a marked impact on elections and it is to the credit of a newspaper that it can engage its readers with such well-informed comment. I, for one, was probably a beneficiary of that when I won a by-election to this place in 1984. Against the official poll odds, I was elected. It was interesting that the lunchtime edition of the newspaper on polling day suggested that I was in a very good position.

I am therefore, conscious that exit polls are a dangerous tool, in the sense that they can influence people during the election process. We shall support the amendment, and I hope that the Minister sees the sense of it and recognises the need for such a provision to appear in this clause and not as part of a schedule.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr. George Howarth)

I hope that I can deal with the amendment briefly. As the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) suggested, the Government are sympathetic to it.

As the hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock) argued, it would be unfortunate if an exit poll were published before the polls had finally closed and, as a result, influenced people's votes. In fact, in some cases, it might encourage people not to vote. If it appeared that a landslide were likely to happen in a constituency or council ward because the exit poll suggested that one candidate was home and dry, people might not bother to vote.

I responded to a similar amendment in Committee and suggested that I was sympathetic to it and would look for an opportunity to address the issues raised then and in this amendment. I am happy to repeat the undertaking: the Home Office is considering how best to address the problem and it will be very tempting to table amendments in another place.

Mr. Gray

I wholeheartedly endorse the points that have been made by hon. Members of all parties. However, I am concerned that such an amendment might affect the legitimate telling operations carried out by all political parties during elections to determine whether their vote has turned out.

Mr. Howarth

I have not as yet seen the Home Office's precise draft of an amendment to be tabled in the other place. However, I think that it would be illegitimate for it to interfere with the workings of political parties. It is legitimate for a political party to gather information for different purposes from voters leaving polling stations if they are willing to provide it. However, in terms of the principle that we are discussing, we would have to distinguish between a political party's making use of exit polls—for want of a better term—to enable it to identify those who have already voted so as not to disturb them further, and its using the information to publish a poll on its behalf. That would be illegitimate.

Complex issues are involved. However, it has suddenly come to me out of the blue that the arrangements that the Home Office intends to make would not affect telling.

Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)

Will the Minister give way?

Mr. Howarth

I will, but I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept that this is the last time that I shall do so. I am about to say something with which he might be rather pleased.

Mr. Bercow

I await with eager anticipation, bated breath and veritable beads of sweat on my brow to hear what the Minister has to say.

Will the Minister confirm that he is not aware of instances—I confess from my experience in Buckingham that I am not aware of them—in which tellers' activities have been used for a partisan advantage by political party? It would be a matter of grave concern if they had. Is it not true that, on the whole, such activities are internalised activities that are conducted for the benefit of the organisation locally, and that there is no evidence of their being used for partisan purposes?

Mr. Howarth

I accept the hon. Gentleman's view entirely. From my experience in the Labour party, I know that the information that is gathered as people exit the polling station is used solely for internal purposes. I am bound to say that such information is not always entirely accurate. On more than one occasion, I have been chased down the path by an irate voter assuring me with such vigour that they have already voted that I am inclined to believe them.

Our intention is to table suitable amendments in the other place to cover precisely the points raised. As I said earlier, we are grateful to the Opposition for raising this important issue. On the basis of the further undertakings that I have given, I hope that the hon. Member for Ribble Valley will feel able to withdraw his amendment.

Mr. Evans

The Minister's response—not only now, but in Committee—shows the usefulness of the Committee stage and the scrutiny that the Bill is receiving.

A polling organisation might publish a poll in a newspaper, on the internet or on television or radio purporting to represent an actual trend because it is based on the response of people who have taken the time and trouble to turn up at polling stations and cast their votes early. That poll may or may not be accurate. We are all aware from our own electoral histories of instances where the polling has been totally accurate and others where it has been totally wrong. Many different polling methods are used, but I am not sure that they are becoming any more accurate.

If a polling organisation gets it wrong, people may decide how to cast their vote on the basis of the information given. That may be false information and it may distort the vote in one way or another. There are therefore powerful reasons to prevent the publication of polling.

My hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Mr. Paterson) legitimately asked whether, since we do not know how the Bill will be amended in another place, there will be an effect on the traditional telling in which political parties become involved. I have been reassured on that point. Perhaps the Minister will take on board the fact that political parties may decide in their telling also to conduct their own polling. We all know that that goes on. In the case of the Liberal Democrats, it is normally done by releasing spurious canvassing returns. They greatly inflate the support that they receive and are shocked when they come third or fourth when the result of the election is announced—when they find that support on the doorstep was not reflected in the votes in the ballot box.

3 pm

Telling would be allowed to continue, but we should also consider circumstances where early polling takes place and political parties publish leaflets and other literature—or information is made available on radio, television or the internet. It would also be wrong if a political party said, "We have done some early polling of those who voted early and we find that we are now first and everybody else is way behind," or even that the result would be very close when in fact it was not.

Telling must be allowed to continue. When the Home Secretary examines pilot projects, I hope that he will ensure that, in any early voting that takes place, the facility of political parties to tell and to look for personation, for example, will be allowed to continue. It should not be made so difficult that we are not allowed fully to fulfil our functions when the poll is taking place.

With the assurances that the Minister has given us, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark, North and Bermondsey)

On a point of order that is relevant to the debate, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I apologise that I did not make it before the previous debate. I have discussed it with the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth).

On the amendment paper yesterday, there were three selections by Madam Speaker that included amendments that had the support of Conservative Members and Liberal Democrat Members. The names of those who had tabled them appeared above them. In each case, the lead name was either the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst or that of the right hon. Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Maclean). There were other amendments above which only those two names appeared.

When we read the selection paper today, we found that two of the three groups that were withdrawn had the support of both Conservative Members and Liberal Democrat Members. I am not pressing you to make a ruling now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but I ask for an indication from you or from Madam Speaker of whether it is in order, as the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst tells me that he was led to believe—I accept that—that shared amendments can be withdrawn without the permission of others who were signatories to them? My hon. Friends and I did not know that the amendments would be withdrawn. We had not been asked and we had not agreed that it should happen. We found that amendments with which we would have persisted were not on the amendment paper.

I am not criticising the right hon. Members for Bromley and Chislehurst or for Penrith and The Border. Clearly, something has gone wrong. One of the amendments was in the group that we have just debated.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

The rules make it clear that the Member who has the lead name—in this instance, the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) —is entitled to withdraw the amendment at any time before it is before the House. Therefore, it is not a matter for the Chair. It is perhaps a matter of courtesy to get in touch with those who added their signatures to the amendment.

Mr. Evans

I beg to move amendment No. 29, in page 12, line 4, at end insert— '(2B) No scheme which makes provision for voting to take place on more than one day and which makes provision for voting to take place on either Saturday or Sunday shall be submitted to or approved by the Secretary of State unless it makes provision for voting to take place on both days.'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this, it will be convenient to discuss amendment No.21, in page 12, line 37, at end insert— '(e) the choice of polling day or days was seen as offensive by religious or other groups; and (f) the choice of polling day or days led to any prejudice of the votes cast by certain groups.'.

Mr. Evans

I hope that the hon. Member for Southwark, North and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) will accept that most of the amendments to which he referred were covered by my amendment. However, I understand his point.

The amendment is the result of discussions that have taken place during the passage of the Bill. We believe that polling taking place on a Sunday would be entirely unacceptable to a large group of people if that was the only day on which polling took place. It would be ironic if, in introducing a Bill designed to enfranchise more people and to encourage more people to vote, even a pilot allowing voting on a Sunday led to a number of people feeling unable to vote. That would be completely against the spirit of the proposed legislation. If polling is to be on only one day, let us put it into the Bill, if it is the position, that polling will not take place on a Saturday or a Sunday.

We all know that there will be problems in any event. If we tried two-day polling on a Saturday and a Sunday, it would allow people who for religious reasons have problems about voting on a day when they are involved in religious observance to vote on the other day.

There are other problems with weekends, which the working party discussed. Life styles are changing for many people, who tend to go away, particularly if they have country homes or caravans, as mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Mr. Paterson). They may decide to go away for the entire weekend. People may be deprived of the opportunity to vote, especially if the amendment that we discussed earlier in the name of the hon. Member for Battersea (Mr. Linton) about earlier postal votes is not accepted.

In addition, the vote might be distorted. I am not too sure that people with caravans would ever take the opportunity of local declarations of interest if they were away from home with their caravans. With weekend voting, people with second homes could distort the vote. I suspect that similar considerations may apply to students, who are on the register in the area of their university and at home. Some students go on short weekend breaks or go back to see their families. Weekend voting needs to be examined carefully.

The amendment relates specifically to the religious consideration. We ask the Minister to let it be known to local authorities that are thinking of having pilot studies in their areas that it would be entirely unacceptable for that to be on a Saturday or a Sunday. It will be for the Home Office to consider various other days if the pilot study submissions show that people want polls on other days. If there is to be voting on a Saturday and a Sunday, only a true pilot study in various areas will properly tell us what the impact will be and whether there will be an increase in voting. I would be entirely opposed to the change of poll from a Thursday to just a Saturday or just a Sunday. Perhaps the Minister can tell us today whether he has received representations from organisations objecting to the piloting of polling on days other than the two that I have mentioned.

Mr. Hancock

Once again, Liberal Democrats have more than a degree of sympathy for the argument advanced by the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans). I would support wholeheartedly the idea of moving the poll from a Thursday to a weekend, but I take his point seriously. Many of us represent multi-ethnic communities in which there are people with strong religious convictions who would find it extremely offensive to have voting only on a Sunday. The provision for weekend voting should allow that voting to be on both days. For some religious groups, voting on a Saturday can be as offensive as can voting on Sunday for other groups. There must be a balance. If weekend voting is to take place, it should be tried in a large enough pool of local authorities to allow its effects to be judged properly. It is simply not good enough for one or two authorities to decide that they will try it out. There is a lot to be said for weekend voting.

It was unfortunate—or perhaps fortunate—that I was not here last night. I was attending a meeting of Portsmouth city council—

Mr. Evans

Job sharing.

Mr. Hancock

Yes, job sharing. The democratic process constituted an interesting part of the meeting's deliberations. We were considering whether to have an elected mayor or Cabinet-style government. A frequent question was, "How can we encourage more people to vote?" I do not believe that having an elected mayor or Cabinet-style local government will achieve that. However, spreading the times and days when people can vote would be advantageous to the democratic process.

Many of us are from local government backgrounds, and have witnessed pitiful turnouts at elections. It is obscene that 10 per cent. is not unusual nowadays and that we no longer find an average turnout of 25 per cent. unacceptable in some big cities. We must do something, and the Bill is a major step towards showing that democracy has to be flexible enough to change with the times.

I want to encourage weekend voting, but we must ensure that we do not disadvantage people who feel that those days are significant for their religious beliefs or social activities. Voting must be held on both days of the weekend.

Mr. George Howarth

I want to tackle briefly two of the points that have been made. First, the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) asked whether we had received any representations about weekend voting. The Home Office has received only one letter, from the Board of Deputies of British Jews, expressing anxiety about voting only on Saturday. That is an unreasonable prospect, especially in areas where there is a concentration of Orthodox Jews, who would find it impossible to vote on a Saturday. The letter also expressed concern about holding an election on the day of a Jewish festival. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will take those matters into account when he considers the applications for pilot schemes, for which the closing date was last Monday. Although my right hon. Friend has not had an opportunity to scrutinise the applications, they will all have been received by now.

The hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock) made an equally valid point. He said that as wide a range of areas as possible should be selected for the pilot schemes so that the results would not be skewed by geographical considerations. The Home Secretary and officials aim for a spread of suitable applications so that they can gain a good picture.

I hope that I can be reasonably brief in dealing with the amendments because, as the hon. Member for Ribble Valley pointed out, we have discussed the issues that they raise on Second Reading and in Committee.

We must ensure that we do not harm the interests of those with strong religious views, which would make it difficult for them to vote on a particular day of the week. At the risk of making the eyes of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) glaze over—although I am not sure of the difference between that and his normal expression—I shall mention again the working party that I chaired. I assure hon. Members that the subject that we are considering has been central to our deliberations for a long time, and we do not wish to do anything to the detriment of voters with strong religious views.

3.15 pm

In Committee, I did my best to provide reassurance on the matter. I quoted a Home Office circular, which pointed out that one of the conditions that local authorities will have to fulfil when applying to run a pilot scheme is making a statement that 'no voter will be put at a disadvantage by the proposed innovation'" —[0fficial Report, 13 January 2000; Vol. 342, c. 489.] That is unambiguous and would cover those with strong religious views.

On Second Reading, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary said: If weekend voting ever became part of the national arrangements, we would have to ensure that it took place on both days." — [Official Report, 30 November 1999; Vol. 340, c. 172.] I also quoted that in Committee on 13 January, at column 501. I know that my right hon. Friend's efforts to provide the House with some reassurance did not fall on deaf ears because the hon. Member for Ribble Valley said on behalf of the Opposition: The Minister has given assurances that those of strong religious beliefs will not be disadvantaged by changes in the pilot schemes or anything that follows them. I am reassured by that." —[Official Report, 13 January 2000; Vol. 342, c. 502.] Nothing has changed in the few days since then and I hope that, in the light of those reassurances, the hon. Gentleman will understand that the amendment is unnecessary and withdraw it.

Let us consider amendment No. 21. It is a clear requirement of any pilot scheme that it must be properly evaluated. That includes not only considering its cost or effect on turnout, but its impact on voters. Clause 10(7)(b) is designed for precisely that purpose. We would expect a local authority to consider the effect of any innovation not just on the electorate overall but on groups of electors that were likely to be particularly affected by the innovation.

Home Office guidance on evaluation, which has been made available to local authorities, suggested that it should specifically cover the acceptability of voting days and times to all faith groups". I assure hon. Members that my right hon. Friend will not approve any applications that involve a change of voting day when that is not part of the evaluation process.

On the basis of what I have said, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will realise that the amendment is unnecessary. However, it was important to debate it.

Mr. Evans

I am grateful for the Minister's assurances and his final comment. It is important to scrutinise the Bill properly and give reasonable time to considering amendments such as Nos. 29 and 21.

I am grateful for the support of Liberal Democrat Members for the amendment. The hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock) talked about the need for a wide enough pool. If the pilot schemes are to be properly evaluated, there must be a range of them, not simply one in the south-east or in the north-west. They must be tested in many regions to enable a proper evaluation.

I also accept the hon. Gentleman's comments about the crisis of democracy, especially in by-elections, where there have been turnouts of 16 per cent. The turnout for one European election was under 10 per cent. That is appalling and I hope that the measure will help to redress that, although I have grave reservations. It will take more than the Bill to achieve that.

The Minister gave reassurances about the regulations that will be established, and said that it would be acceptable for a specific local authority to undertake a pilot on both days of a weekend, but unacceptable for it to move polling from Thursday to Saturday or Sunday. I am grateful for that.

I was interested to learn that the deadline for applications to carry out pilot schemes this year has already passed. I should be grateful for an early indication of the number of applications.

Mr. Howarth

I shall ensure that the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. O'Brien) provides that information as soon as possible.

Mr. Evans

I am grateful for that. Perhaps an analysis of the sort of schemes that people are suggesting can be provided early so that other local authorities that have not had an opportunity to submit a pilot scheme for this year will have some food for thought. I understand that the pilot schemes can be submitted next year, too.

I seek clarification from the Minister of one further matter. It will be expensive for voting to take place on more than one day, and I know that the Home Secretary will consider carefully the cost of the pilot studies. If a local authority decided to hold two whole days of polling, I assume that that would be extremely expensive.

Mr. Gerald Bermingham (St. Helens, South)

My local authority, St. Helens, made an application for a two-day polling pilot and the estimated cost is £5,000, which is not very great.

Mr. Evans

Five thousand pounds—[Interruption.] I hear the hon. Member for St. Helens, South (Mr. Bermingham), from a sedentary position, referring to six wards. When local elections are held in parts of local authority areas, they can perhaps be carried out at reasonable cost, but when they involve more than six wards, twice as many personnel are likely to be needed, and at weekends they would have to be paid time and a half or double time. The implications of that must be taken into account.

If a local authority wants to move from polling on a Thursday to polling over two days, as the Home Secretary will not permit voting on only a Saturday or only a Sunday, it can decide to conduct only partial polling on the Saturday and whole polling on the Sunday, or the other way round. In other words, all the polling stations in an area would be open on one day, and fewer would be open on the other day.

We know that, in certain parts of constituencies, there are concentrations of people of certain religious persuasions who would be affected by that. They would not receive the same service as was delivered to others in the constituency. If such people decided that, for religious reasons, they could not vote on the Saturday, they could be disadvantaged by having to vote on the Sunday. They might have to travel greater distances because their local polling station might not be open. They would be told that polling stations were open in certain other areas, or perhaps only one polling station would be open in the town hall.

Mr. Hancock

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way. If the Minister responds to that point, I hope that he does so with caution. I understand the need to keep costs down, but the possibility that, over a two-day period, ballot boxes would not be available universally in a ward or constituency on one day would be a big mistake, and would leave the local authority or any other body conducting the election open to serious challenge.

Mr. Evans

I am seeking an assurance from the Minister that, if voting is held over two days, it will be universal, and that people will not be offered a second-class service because of their religious convictions. If they had to travel considerable distances to vote, it might put them off voting.

Mr. William Ross (East Londonderry)

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. There is a point which, as far as I am aware, has not been raised in the debate—the integrity of the ballot box which, I assume, will have to be sealed and collected at the end of the first day of voting. Where will the ballot boxes be stored? Who will look after them and ensure that they are not tampered with? Who will make sure that the following morning they are taken back to the same polling station and the same booth? That is a serious issue.

Mr. Evans

I am grateful for that intervention from the hon. Gentleman. I have observed elections in the United Kingdom, Sri Lanka and the United States, and I have not come across polling taking place on more than one day. In the pilot study, local authorities that want to move from polling on a Thursday will have to hold voting over two days. From what the Minister said, they will not have a choice. The Home Secretary has made it clear that, if voting is to be held over a weekend, it must be held on both Saturday and Sunday. Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are asking that voting should be conducted universally over the two days, if the pilot studies are allowed over a weekend.

I hope that the Minister will take on board the point made by the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr. Ross). Perhaps he will write to us. If the Home Secretary decides on voting over a Saturday and a Sunday, what will happen to the ballot boxes in the intervening period, so that everyone can be assured that the integrity of the poll will be maintained? It will be difficult for political parties to provide sufficient people to scrutinise the way in which ballot boxes are stored.

Hon. Members in all parts of the House will want to be assured that, if polling takes place over more than one day, full information will be provided to the political parties about where the polling stations will be, the duration of the poll, and the details mentioned by the hon. Member for East Londonderry concerning the integrity of the poll and the personnel involved.

Mr. David Ruffley (Bury St. Edmunds)

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Is it his understanding that, under the Bill as drafted, the Government could contemplate polling over a Saturday and a Sunday, but that, on either of those days, ballot boxes could be only partially available to part of the population?

Mr. Evans

Yes. There is nothing to stop a local authority putting in for a pilot in its area that would involve polling all day on a Saturday but only partially in certain areas on a Sunday, or all day on a Sunday and only partially on a Saturday. There is nothing in the Bill to prevent that, or indeed to prevent a local authority from holding a poll over more than two days, but the cost would be prohibitive, and I know that the Home Secretary will take cost into account.

Mr. David Ruffley (Bury St. Edmonds)

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way once again. Will he bear in mind the concerns of those of us who represent rural constituencies? Especially in rural areas where there are predominantly urban borough councils, urban members often dictate policy without regard to the interests of rural constituents. I know that Ministers are in listening mode and I hope that they will have particular regard to the interests of rural constituents, who will be singularly disadvantaged if there is partial voting on a Saturday or Sunday, as my hon. Friend described.

Mr. Evans

I am sure that the Minister will have heard the concerns of my hon. Friend. I share those concerns. I, too, represent a rural constituency, although in some parts it is more urban than in others. Problems may arise if a partial poll were conducted on one of the two days. I hope that the Minister will take that on board, and I look forward to his reassurances in writing or written into the Bill when it goes to another place.

Mr. George Howarth

rose—

Mr. Evans

Does the Minister seek to intervene?

Mr. Howarth

What I am about to say may be longer than an intervention.

Mr. Evans

I seek guidance from the Chair. Must I seek permission to withdraw the amendment after the Minister has spoken?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

After the Minister has spoken, the hon. Gentleman may seek leave to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. Howarth

Must I seek leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

That is not necessary. It is the Minister's business.

Mr. Howarth

I am grateful for that guidance, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I shall deal briefly with the points that have been raised, starting with the point made by the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr. Ross), through the Opposition Front Bench. The security arrangements for ballot boxes used in early voting will be exactly the same as for those used for postal votes, which are of course received before election day. Electoral administrators are entirely familiar with the procedures for keeping ballot boxes secure and I have every confidence that they can do that in those particular circumstances. When my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary considers a particular application, however, he will have proper regard for not only the cost, as the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) said, but the integrity of the ballot. If there were any doubt about whether a particular application could ensure a ballot's integrity, he would not approve the pilot scheme.

3.30 pm

It may be of assistance if I tell hon. Members that, at close of play on Monday, 44 local authorities had made applications, including those of St. Helens, to which my hon. Friend the Member for St. Helens, South (Mr. Bermingham) referred, and Knowsley—surprise, surprise. Some involve more than one innovation and, if I understood him correctly, that is the case for St. Helens.

Relevant points about voting being spread over two days were made by the hon. Members for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans), who referred to religious interests, and for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Ruffley), who was concerned about people in rural areas. When my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary considers a scheme, he has to decide whether any voter would be disadvantaged and in doing so obviously needs to be mindful of religious interests, the interests of rural and urban areas and so on. In such circumstances, he would find it difficult not to take the interests of rural voters into account, and would not want to disregard them anyway. Hon. Members might not be aware that my constituency has contained a large rural area since the Boundary Commission changes were made for the last general election, so I also have an interest in the matter. I hope that those assurances are helpful.

Mr. Evans

With the leave of the House. I stress once again that, although piloting may take place on one day of a weekend, there should be equality on both days, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Ruffley) said. With those assurances, I beg to seek leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.