Electoral Administration Bill

I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Rennard, for proposing the amendments. On Amendment No. 56, the noble Lord rightly raises the question that came up in the judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights on the Hirst case. Now it is beholden on us to consult on that, and we plan to do so. I do not have the details of the publication, but I take on board the categories—if I may put it that way—of people that the noble Lord referred to. I will pass that back to consider what we might do and the consultation. I cannot do much with Amendment No. 56 at this point, because it must be part of that broader consultation, to which the Government are committed. I have enormous sympathy with Amendment No. 55. I, too, have talked to the Mental Health Act Commission, and it told me that patients raise this issue with commissioners from time to time. I imagine that there were reasons in the old days why we thought that people who were detained, perhaps under a 28-day section, should vote in that manner. My guess is that it was the last thing on anyone’s mind that they should find a way of registering for a vote by post or by proxy if they were being detained, perhaps because they had severe depression and needed to be looked after. There is no doubt that if you are detained you get better. Many people who have been sectioned spend a lot of time in the community in the normal course of their day. This is a good example where if they are able to go out they should be able to do that. I cannot accept the wording of the amendment, and I need to get agreement on this, but I am minded to accept it for all the reasons that the noble Lord has mentioned. I am grateful to him.