LOCAL POLLS (Hansard, 15 September 2003)

§ Mr. Raynsford
I beg to move, That the House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
Clause 117 confirms the right of a local authority to conduct an advisory poll. The provision creates an express power and removes doubt about the freedom of local authorities to hold advisory polls. It gives councils maximum flexibility on who is polled and how the poll is conducted.
We carefully considered the points raised in the Lords Committee on requiring local authorities to have regard to guidance about making local polls accessible to local people and in particular to people with disabilities. We have tabled the amendment in order to provide for the Secretary of State in England and the National Assembly for Wales in Wales to be able to issue guidance to which local authorities must have regard on facilitating participation by disabled people in a local poll. I am sure that that will be widely welcomed and I hope that no one will object to its becoming part of the Bill.

§ Mr. Hammond
The Minister is right. No one, I am sure, will object to the amendment, but that does not mean that no one will have any questions about it. The provision allows guidance to be issued on disabled access to local polls—polls for the purpose of testing local opinion by local authorities, as distinct from local election polls. It looks like mum and apple pie. I agree with the Minister: who could possibly be against it? My question relates to the fact that the guidance referred to here must be in respect specifically of the local advisory polls; the right to conduct them is confirmed by clause 117.
The thrust of the Bill is to be decentralising; the Minister keeps reciting the mantra of freedom and flexibility. It would be odd if the appropriate person, the Secretary of State in England and the relevant Minister in the Welsh Assembly, could issue guidance to local authorities in relation to section 117 polls which did not have to be complied with in relation to elections or referendums conducted out of the same polling stations. We are all for access but the obligations on local authorities conducting section 117 polls must not be more onerous than in the case of the arguably more important elections and referendums that will often take place in the same buildings.
I am hoping and expecting that the Minister will tell me that he will undertake that the guidance that will be issued in relation to section 117 polls will reflect only requirements that are imposed on returning officers in relation to elections and referendums. It would be entirely appropriate if this measure were seen as a way of ensuring that the good practice that the Government will, I hope, seek to impose in terms of ensuring disabled access to polling stations for referendums and elections will be carried over into these local polls that local authorities hold. I would not like to see a more onerous obligation in respect of those polls than those imposed 664 in respect of elections and referendums. The sentiment behind the amendment is sound, but I seek reassurance from the Minister that the bizarre circumstances that I postulated will not arise and that he will issue guidance to ensure that that does not occur.

§ Mr. Edward Davey
I support the amendment, which was presaged by an amendment tabled by Baroness Hamwee on 24 June in the other place. She tabled the amendment following discussions with the Royal National Institute for the Blind, which felt that this would be a useful move. The Government have clearly responded to that positively, which is to be welcomed.
In passing, it is interesting to note that we did not have a chance to debate the clause in Committee. We could have a spat about whether it was the Government or the Opposition who were to blame. However, there were a number of long and tedious speeches that went off the point—

§ Mr. Hammond
The hon. Gentleman will recall that we voted against the timetable motion in Committee.

§ Mr. Davey
I do recall that. The point I was making was that we did not get to examine the clause the first time around. No doubt we could have raised points about it and other matters that have not been debated.
The new power under the clause is clearly to be welcomed. It is important that disabled people are able to participate in polls, and I hope that we can move on.

§ Mr. Raynsford
There was no intention to impose requirements in respect of local polls more onerous than those that apply to elections or referendums conducted other than under the provisions of the clause. However, during the Lords debate, questions were raised as to whether the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 applied in this area. Under the Act, it will be unlawful from October 2004 for service providers, including public authorities, to discriminate against a disabled person in how the provider provides services. There has been some doubt as to whether "services" includes the provision of polling facilities for local and national elections or local polls. We expect the future extension of the Act to cover local authority functions to clarify whether it applies to local polls. This will not come into force until 2006. In that situation, we felt it sensible that guidance should be extended to ensure that what applies in relation to elections—for example, guidance issued by the Electoral Commission—should also apply to local polls.

§ Mr. Hammond
The Minister is coming to the key point. He referred to the expectation that the Disability Discrimination Act will be extended to cover local authority functions and, thus, local polls. Does the Act already cover elections and referendums? If not, does he expect it to be extended to cover those services?

§ Mr. Raynsford
My understanding is that the guidance issued by the Electoral Commission ensures that there are suitable arrangements that would comply with the requirements of the Act. I have said that there is some question as to whether the Act applies. We want to make sure that there is a consistency of approach between local polls, national elections and referendums 665 and that there should be an easy passage from where we are now to the future position if the Act is extended. I hope that that satisfies the hon. Gentleman.