Political Parties and Elections Bill

We have had an extremely interesting exchange of views, and I am grateful for all contributions to the debate. I shall briefly address some of the concerns that have been raised. The hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mrs. Laing) rightly raised the importance of data protection and data security in the CORE project, and, on that, I absolutely agree, which is why the Information Commissioner will be consulted on it. The hon. Lady asked about the timetable, and we are actively looking at that. Indeed, we need to ensure that it is the most appropriate way forward. It is an opportunity to ensure that we are ready when the time comes, but we are looking at it. The hon. Lady mentioned the cost of the CORE system. To date, the figure is £3.7 million, and the great bulk of that money has been spent on grants to local authorities to standardise the format in which data are collected and stored. That work is important and it makes the data much easier to use generally, so, whatever happens to the CORE project, we believe that it will have been money well spent on improving the electoral system. I was grateful for what the hon. Lady said about the timetable for the move to individual registration. She asked us to come back to the House regularly to report on its progress, and I am happy to give her that reassurance. That is precisely why we have asked the Electoral Commission to produce annual reports. It is important that the whole process be scrutinised, and every Member will have important personal and constituency experience to contribute to the process. In the past and today, the hon. Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) has given us his experience from his rather special constituency, but every constituency is special and there will be lessons that every Member can teach us as we move forward. This Government certainly want to learn those lessons. We welcome the scrutiny and transparency that the hon. Member for Epping Forest advocates, and we intend to have that. I am grateful to her for supporting the process. The hon. Lady raised also the important question of service registration, and I agree with everything that she said about that. She will recall that we discussed the issue in Committee. As she mentioned, we have already agreed to raise from three to five years the service declaration period for members of the armed forces. We will introduce that as soon as possible, and we recognise its importance. Ministry of Justice officials will meet Ministry of Defence and Electoral Commission officials to review the information campaigns that have run since 2005. They have seen significant improvements in registration, but not enough, and I share her concerns about the matter. We need to do everything that we can, and we will continue to do so. I remind the hon. Lady that in Committee I said that hon. Members on both sides of the House who had significant garrisons in their constituencies could come to see me with their own suggestions. So far, not a single one has taken advantage of that opportunity. I repeat the invitation, and I am sure that she will do her best to publicise it. We want to get the issue right, and we will do everything that we can to do that. The hon. Member for Cambridge raised a point about there being another quango, and I understand what he said. As I have already said, I hope that he will be reassured by the fact that the measure will be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure and that both the Information Commissioner and the Electoral Commission will have to be consulted. Unfortunately, my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Clwyd (Chris Ruane) is not here; the hon. Member for Cambridge made some comments about him. In my hon. Friend's defence, I should say that he is concerned about the robustness of the governance system. He was using an example; we could find others if we trawled through our own experiences. His main concern, I think, was one of principle about the system of governance. As I said, we are considering that issue, notwithstanding the fact that the great majority of electoral registration officers in local authorities run by all parties behave with complete propriety and are jealous guardians of the integrity of the system. The hon. Gentleman raised again the worry about the power to change the identifier. I can only say to him again that we intend to use dates of birth, signatures and national insurance numbers, which cover the great majority of the eligible population. However, it would be unwise and imprudent of us not to allow some flexibility in the system. Who knows what the future may hold? The hon. Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope) made an interesting contribution in diverting our attention to his recent experiences in Albania. I am glad that he has been present for at least part of the extended progress of the Bill and I am grateful for his contribution. I suggest that he takes some reading with him the next time he goes overseas. He might be interested in the Electoral Commission's reports on recent elections in this country; the most recent was produced with the Association of Chief Police Officers. I think that he will be reassured by the commentary on the incidence of fraud in this country; the report says that it is declining. I strongly recommend that report to the hon. Gentleman. He is obviously agitated about the issue, and when he next goes to Albania or anywhere else he can comfort himself by reading it. More generally, I am concerned that the hon. Gentleman obviously did not listen to what I was saying about the risks of a precipitate rush to individual registration. Furthermore, he did not seem to listen to his party's Front Benchers on that issue. I hope that he will read Hansard tomorrow and see that we are moving as rapidly as we can towards that desirable objective, in a way commensurate with the twin objectives that are immutable in the eyes of Front Benchers of both Opposition parties. They are that the register must be as comprehensive and as accurate as possible. We must achieve those twin ideals.