Electoral Administration Bill

I take it that I will not reply to the amendment that has not been pressed and will move swiftly on to Amendment No. 50C. We have made it clear that anonymous registration is separate from the canvass and will operate through an annual declaration. That is the same as the provisions that exist for people registered via a declaration of local connection, a service declaration, an overseas electors’ declaration, or by virtue of residence in a penal institution or mental hospital, all of whom are excluded from the annual canvass and are required to renew their registration on an annual basis. It is right that an anonymous registration should ordinarily last for 12 months. It strikes a balance to ensure that it is a limited, but viable system for people to be able to demonstrate a current threat. A declaration-based system will also avoid the possibility of the confusion and administrative complexity that could be generated if a person were able to register anonymously through a household canvass form. While we agree that anonymous registration should be limited to those who need it, and available only while it is necessary, we believe that Amendments Nos. 50C and 50D are too restrictive. Under these amendments a person’s anonymous registration would expire on 30 November regardless of when their application was granted. Therefore, they could have to register perhaps twice in a year, which we believe would be too burdensome. We have sought to do it this way in order to follow the way in which other declarations have been done. We hope that the noble Lord will agree on that balance. As regards the noble Lord’s comments about the overall attempt by the Government to deal with these questions, I was with him until he said the word, ““however””, and moved into his more ““sceptical”” mode. This matter is about vulnerable people. Other people may try to find them to do them harm—whether that is stalking, domestic violence, or a person being under police protection, and so on. This is not about a slippery slope to somewhere else; it is about making sure that just because someone wants to do a person harm, that person does not have his democratic right taken away. The protection that the noble Lord seeks comes in the fact that it is by affirmative regulation in your Lordships’ House and another place. Therefore, the noble Lord can keep his eye on it and ensure that what I have said is true. This is specifically about that. On that basis, the noble Lord would accept that there is a need for this, and would welcome it, on the basis of ensuring that people who are victims do not get disenfranchised.