HL Deb 27 April 1999 vol 600 cc225-31

7.53 p.m.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Dubs) rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 13th April be approved [15th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the regulations apply to Northern Ireland only and cover a limited number of aspects of electoral procedure for the forthcoming European parliamentary elections. This is in contrast to the Great Britain regulations which were far more wide-ranging, covering the conduct of all aspects of the new regional list voting system for Great Britain. The regulations before us today introduce mach more minor and technical amendments to existing statute. They are tailored to fit the particular local circumstances of Northern Ireland, where the single transferable vote system of proportional representation will continue to be the electoral system used.

Despite being modest in content, this draft instrument is nevertheless essential to bring European parliamentary elections in Northern Ireland into line with recently passed United Kingdom-wide legislation. As many in your Lordships' House will know, the European Parliamentary Elections Act 1999, which received Royal Assent on 14th January, introduced the new electoral system for European elections. This new list system applies to Great Britain only. The STV system of proportional representation which has been employed in Northern Ireland for European parliamentary elections since 1979 remains unaltered.

However, the 1999 Act changed some of the terminology applicable to all European Parliamentary elections in the UK, and this draft legislation reflects these technical changes for Northern Ireland Consequently, references to the European "parliamentary constituencies" and "representatives". referred to under the 1978 Act, will be amended to read "Electoral Regions" and "Members of the European Parliament".

In a similarly technical amendment, this piece of legislation also makes provision, in Regulation 5, in respect of by-elections for European parliamentary seats. Again this is an amendment consequential to the 1999 European Parliamentary Elections Act, which replaced the provisions in the 1978 Act by delegating them to subordinate legislation. I must stress that both the existing mechanism for triggering a by-election and the electoral procedures involved are unaltered by these amendments.

In accordance with the practice which was adopted in Northern Ireland for the Forum election of 1996 and the Northern Ireland Assembly elections last year, we have decided not to apply Section 93 of the Representation of the People Act 1983. Under the Act broadcast media are prevented from covering a "constituency" campaign issue without the consent of all the candidates standing within that constituency. Such consent is not required to cover issues considered "national".

The distinction between "national" and "constituency" issues is often somewhat artificial, particularly for European parliamentary elections in Northern Ireland where the whole of Northern Ireland is treated as one constituency. In addition, it is clearly difficult to seek the permission of each one of the large number of candidates who may choose to stand in the electoral region. Disapplying this provision will make practical sense and will for these elections bring Northern Ireland into line with the European Parliamentary Elections Regulations for the rest of the UK.

The draft regulations before your Lordships' House make provision for the application of the provisions of the Registration of Political Parties Act 1998 to European parliamentary elections held in Northern Ireland. This Act enables political parties to register their names and, if they so choose, their party emblem. Once registered a party benefits from protection against the unauthorised use of its registered name, and its candidates may request the inclusion of their party emblem on the ballot paper.

Regulations 6(12) and (15) of this draft are necessary to amend existing regulations to allow parties registered under the Act to place their registered name and emblem on the ballot for European parliamentary elections in Northern Ireland should they so choose. The provisions of the Act do not automatically apply to European parliamentary elections held in Northern Ireland. Noble Lords will see that the schedule to this draft instrument provides a new specimen ballot paper illustrating these changes.

We have also decided that it would be appropriate to update the amount which each candidate may spend in election expenses. The limit of candidates' election expenses for European elections was last set in 1994 for the election of that year. We considered that it would be appropriate to review the level at which the expenses were set, and consequently the revised figures in these draft regulations reflect an inflationary increase on the 1994 figures to bring them up to date. As I have previously mentioned, the electoral system to be employed in Northern Ireland in June has not altered, so there has been no necessity to devise a new system of calculating candidates' expenses, as there has been in Great Britain.

A further important amendment which this legislation brings forward is an amendment to Section 75 of the Representation of the People Act 1983. The expenditure which can be incurred by a third party without the approval of an election agent is determined by Section 75 of this Act in the amount of just £5. However this provision as applied to parliamentary elections was found to be in breach of Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights. It was the judgment of the Court in the Bowman case that setting the limit on such expenditure at such a low threshold placed an unjustified restriction on freedom of expression. Accordingly, we have increased the £5 limit for these European parliamentary elections to £5,000.

I hope your Lordships will agree that this increased figure accords with the spirit of the recommendations contained within the report of the Neill Committee. The report advocated a limit of £500 for each parliamentary constituency. However, for European parliamentary elections Northern Ireland is not divided into constituencies but the whole of Northern Ireland is treated as one much larger electoral region. Consequently, we have therefore opted for the higher amount of £5,000 to cover the entire electoral region. This amount is identical to that which will apply for each of the electoral regions in Great Britain.

In conclusion, this draft instrument makes provision for a number of relatively technical amendments to the existing statutory framework for European elections in Northern Ireland which, while relatively minor, are nevertheless essential if the June elections are to run smoothly. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 13th April be approved [15th Report from the Joint Committee]. —(Lord Dubs.)

Baroness Seccombe

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for explaining the aims of the regulations. My first comment concerns these regulations and in addition those that apply to Scotland and Wales, which have been debated. Surely, this indicates a need for primary legislation in a new representation of the people Act. This would give the House the opportunity to debate and amend proposals in a Bill—a luxury that we do not have with secondary legislation.

I understand that these regulations are technical and mirror much of the Great Britain regulations which were debated in your Lordships' House on 22nd April. These regulations are specifically tailored to fit the local circumstances in Northern Ireland. I wish to ask three questions. First, I deal with the issue of recounts. My noble friend Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish exposed a flaw in the legislation. He has done battle with the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Mostyn. I understand that the single transferable vote has been in place in Northern Ireland since 1979. Is the Minister able to assure me that a candidate who may be well down the list will be able to call for a recount where the figures are close and can be vital to the final result?

Secondly, in Regulation 6(4) I am mystified by the hefty hike from £5 to £5,000. I thought that this item was concerned with the required deposit, but surely the previous figure was £1,000, not £5. I would be grateful if the noble Lord could assist me with my comprehension.

I come last to by-elections. I refer the Minister to the example of the ballot paper on page 4 of the regulations. For ease, suppose that the first three are elected, with number four coming next. Then for some reason one of the three Members leaves the European Parliament. At that stage number four will be deemed to be elected. However, a difficulty will arise as he comes from another party. Proportionality would be lost and it would be a return to first-past-the-post. Can the Minister explain how what appears to be completely illogical and against government thinking is acceptable in this instance?

Lord Redesdale

My Lords, we on these Benches support the regulations in their entirety. It is pleasing to note that now in Scotland, England and Wales we also have the benefit of proportional representation in the European parliamentary elections for the first time. I have little to ask about the measure because most of it is self-explanatory. I thought that the part on by-elections would have answered the question posed by the noble Baroness.

My question is concerned with the increase from £5 to £5,000. I went back through the legislation and looked at the 1978 Act. I found that in that year the figure that could be spent by an individual was 50p and in 1983 it went up to £5. In 1999 it has gone up to £5,000. That shows quite a jump in inflation. My colleagues in the Alliance Party thought that perhaps they should not make it common knowledge among all their supporters in case they went out and spent vast amounts of money on the election.

I have one question on the form of the ballot paper. Will independent candidates be able to choose their own emblem? At the moment it appears that a blank space by a name may be seen in some cases as a disadvantage. I do not believe that it will cause the electorate any particular difficulty. I have monitored many elections around the world. I remember monitoring elections in South Africa where sometimes help had to be given to the electorate in finding their candidates. This was helped by members of the Inkatha party. Inkatha joined the election at the last minute and a sticker had to be added at the bottom. When assistance was asked for in voting for the particular party, all they had to say was "On the bottom". Apart from that, we support these provisions.

Lord Molyneaux of Killead

My Lords, I am sure that half an hour ago the noble Lord, like others participating in this debate, looked forward to addressing a full House. For some reason or other that I cannot understand, most noble Lords have disappeared. The Minister explained how the regulations had been tailored to meet the needs of the slightly different system in Northern Ireland and various other conditions there. I believe that I have a duty to acquaint your Lordships with how that different system came about. In the late 1970s when the then government of the United Kingdom was preparing for the very first European elections they identified the one party that should be guaranteed a Euro-seat. They did better than that and went on to identify by name the one candidate who must be guaranteed that seat.

To achieve that result the then government decided to impose proportional representation on Northern Ireland alone. That was why we had it 20 years ahead of the rest of the United Kingdom. But to make that scheme work in 1979 Her Majesty's then government had to upset the nice round figure that had been decreed for the European Parliament and create an odd figure by adding one to ensure that Northern Ireland did not have the two seats to which it was just about entitled but three to make the system of proportional representation work and ensure the election of the candidate who was named by the government. I shall not embarrass that individual by naming him. but he is not present here.

The two seats would not have secured the election of what I may call their man. Therefore, the rigged election, having worked in 1979, continued to keep in place the chosen one of Irish politics for 20 years, which is something of a record. In fairness to noble Lords I felt that I should explain why this curious situation—which is not quite the same as in the rest of the United Kingdom—has applied to Northern Ireland for an unbroken record of 20 years.

The modern extraordinary variation lies in the increase from £5 to £5,000. I hope that I have got the terminology right. There may be some confusion about the amount that a person not authorised by an election agent may spend to influence the election of a candidate. It is not, as I understand it, anything to do with that amount which is permitted to be spent by the candidate and/or his agent.

This time this startling change was made not by the government of the day but at the behest of the European Court of Human Rights. I have to say, with very great respect, that however learned in law the Commission members may be, their ridiculous ruling shows clearly that they have never fought elections and still less could they have served as an election agent.

One result of all of that is certain: national corrupt practices courts will have to brace themselves for overtime duties in the year ahead after the European elections.

I shall restrain myself from comment on the proposed form of the ballot paper, beyond suggesting that maybe the designers of the graffiti tailplanes for British Airways might have done a slightly better job.

Lord Dubs

My Lords, I am grateful for the comments made and will do my best to answer the specific questions.

The noble Baroness, Lady Seccombe, is aware of why we do not normally have primary legislation for issues relating to Northern Ireland. After devolution, the Northern Ireland Assembly will be able to deal with these matters as primary legislation; for the moment we are stuck with a system which has some faults but which is the one we have been using for some time now.

Lord Molyneaux of Killead

My Lords, I think that the noble Lord has said that the Stormont Assembly, when it begins to work, will deal with such matters. Will it have jurisdiction over electoral law, particularly in regard to European elections?

Lord Dubs

My Lords, no, it will not have jurisdiction over electoral law. The noble Lord is quite right and I thank him for that. As a general proposition, however, under this particular procedure a great deal of the Northern Ireland legislation which we deal with in this House will be passed in future to the Assembly; but not matters that stay within the responsibility of this Parliament.

Turning to the specific points which have been raised, the first question the noble Baroness asked related to recounts and whether someone lower down the list could call for a recount. Normally, it may be appropriate in relation to a person lower down the list and where a change would influence the outcome in the vote, but I would prefer to write to the noble Baroness and give her more information. I suspect that the answer will be that the returning officer will exercise his or her discretion in each particular instance.

I deal now with the £5,000 and the question of deposits. The £1,000 deposit is what a candidate has to put up. If the candidate fails to achieve a certain proportion or quota of the vote, the candidate will forfeit the deposit, as is the case in parliamentary elections here.

The £5,000 figure—an increase from £5, which mirrors Great Britain legislation—is the sum of money which can be spent by a third party without the approval of the election agent. A third party, not a candidate, is therefore allowed to spend up to £5,000 in this election in Northern Ireland: presumably expenditure intended to make some political point as regards the elections. That is quite different from the deposit that a candidate has to put down, which the candidate may lose if his or her vote is rather small.

Lord Redesdale

My Lords, is there no limit on the number of individuals who could put forward £5,000?

Lord Dubs

My Lords, I was afraid that question was coming! My understanding is that there is no limit, but I shall look into it further. If by any chance that answer is not correct, I shall write to the noble Lord and to the noble Baroness and make it clear.

Lord Molyneaux of Killead

My Lords, I put this point to the Minister while he meditates on the question which has just been put to him. This is not a facetious matter and should not be treated as such. One can envisage an election influenced by certain unofficial groups or lobby groups, and one thinks immediately of angry farmers or angry lorry drivers. If they are all permitted—and they are, as I understand the regulations—to spend £5,000, we could end up with other candidates beyond their chosen candidate benefiting by some £50,000 more. That could be spent quite legitimately, not by the candidate or his agent, but by the lobby group, without any approval from Parliament or from anyone else.

Lord Dubs

My Lords, I understand what the noble Lord is saying. As I said to the noble Lord, Lord Redesdale, I want to look into this further. If what I have said needs to be elaborated on in any way or if it should not he fully correct, I shall be happy to write to the noble Lords who have taken part in this debate.

I draw a clear distinction between the sum of money which is a deposit and the amount of money which can be spent by a third party. It is the latter which is the subject of the discussions which we have just had.

The noble Baroness also asked a question about by-elections. Let me explain how by-elections will work. I do not think that the noble Baroness has it quite right in the way she described it. If there is a by-election, there will be a straightforward election based on a first-past-the-post contest to fill the single vacancy. It will not pass down the list to a candidate who did not succeed.

I appreciate that that is a different procedure from that adopted in the elections for the Northern Ireland Assembly, but it is a procedure which we have been using in Northern Ireland ever since these arrangements were first put in place. I do not think that we have had any by-elections in those years, but we are certainly not seeking to change that.

The noble Lord. Lord Redesdale, asked about the use of the emblem on the ballot paper. Only registered political parties can use the emblem. Independent candidates would not be able to do so. On the sample ballot paper which has been printed they would simply be designated as independent candidates, together with the other details about them.

I believe that I have dealt with all the questions that have been put and I commend the regulations to your Lordships.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 8.53 p.m.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

[The Sitting was suspended from 8.18 to 8.53 p.m.]