Electoral Administration Bill

In debates on local government and election law, I often find myself in consistent agreement with the noble Lord, Lord Greaves. That may be an embarrassment to him but it is a matter of coincidental interest to me, and I support him on one of these amendments in particular. I am not in any way reopening a matter raised at Second Reading, but there was a triangular discussion between the Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, and me about whether this Committee stage should be taken in Grand Committee or on the Floor of the House. The Minister gave a ruling. She agreed that the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, were excellent, and I am not quarrelling with that at all. But one of the minor disadvantages of dealing in Grand Committee with a Bill which is comparatively controversial is that it can conflict with a Bill which is in the Chamber because it is controversial. Later this afternoon, I shall have to choose whether I sit here or whether I go into the Chamber for a Bill in which I have been involved consistently since it started. I say that for the benefit of the government Whip. That kind of conflict can arise as a result of taking a controversial Bill in Grand Committee. However, that is by the by and, as I said, I am not reopening the issue. The amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Greaves—I nearly called him ““my noble friend””—that I wish to address is Amendment No. 15. As I understand it, the logic of the Bill supports the amendment, and it may well be that the Minister will say that it is unnecessary because the logic of the Bill determines that. But I would feel happier if the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, was on the face of the Bill. I apologise for being personal, but I add, out of personal experience, that if you are the kind of voter whom terrorists in various parts of the world may be seeking to assassinate, the manner in which your name is recorded on the electoral register will be of some importance because, by definition, it identifies where you live. My experience is that electoral registration officers in different local authorities treat this matter differently; they do not necessarily allow you to do in their district what is done elsewhere. As a result, what is on the original local register becomes of extreme importance to you, not least because you can remember it. If, in fact, the CORE does not transmit the details precisely, you will have great difficulty in persuading the officer at the polling station that you are who you are, even though you may appear to be someone else.