Electoral Administration Bill

moved Amendment No. 26:"Page 4, line 2, leave out ““may pay grant”” and insert ““must make sufficient financial provision available””" The noble Lord said: The amendments in this group are about money. To us, they make common sense. Amendment No. 26 removes Clause 3(4). It seems odd that a grant, which suggests an amount of money that is granted or given, should have to be repaid. If the Government mean to give loans to fund the CORE scheme, that should be made clear. The Secretary of State is currently under no obligation to pay for the establishment of CORE schemes. Clause 3(1) merely states:"““The Secretary of State may pay grant to a CORE keeper towards expenditure””." The consultation paper is the only official indication of what the CORE scheme will be like. It states that the Government have provided capital modernisation funds and that it is intended that part of the funding will be given to local authorities in the form of capital grants. However, the burden of setting up and maintaining the CORE schemes will fall on local authorities, or so the consultation paper tells us. Even at this early stage, the Government are bowing out of supporting their already much-burdened councils. I do not see why this should be competing against care for the elderly or something like that. Much as I support elections and want as many people to vote in them as possible, such expenditure should come out of the taxation fund rather than council tax. Local authorities may need to work on the data to bring it up to standard. Note the commitment of the Government to this scheme. As the paper goes on, it states that the Government expect to contribute to the cost of these steps only where it is ““reasonable to do so””. What is more, once the scheme has been established, local authorities will be expected to maintain the register without extra funding. The consultation paper tells us that:"““Grant Determination will, where appropriate, be made to authorities to cover the costs of developing their in-house systems. CORE will not, however, pay for enhancing IT infrastructure or purchasing of new systems””." Our amendment ensures that a grant is paid directly to the CORE scheme, lessening the burden on local authorities. A thorough assessment of costs would have to be made before projects were undertaken. The amendment makes careful provision for the funding of the CORE scheme, ensuring that while costs are kept low, local authorities do not bear the brunt of overspending. The cost of elections to Essex County Council—my own—was £1 million last year, which is twice as much as it was four years ago. Council tax payers are increasingly funding the cost of elections at the expense of things like care for the elderly, as I said earlier. We have to ensure that these regimes are funded in the right way. I beg to move.