I am grateful to the Minister, who has been extremely courteous this afternoon. His speech was clearly well intentioned, but it was very old fashioned and traditional. It is the traditional approach from his Department—if we can refer to a fairly new Department as traditional—that the Minister should accept the principle and resist the amendment with every fibre of his body.
I regret that the Minister has taken that approach this afternoon. I am pleased, of course, to hear his endorsement of the principles underlying the amendments, so we can be agreed across the Chamber about the intentions and what we want to happen in the election. I take some comfort from that, but officials always tell the Minister to resist. The job of a Minister is to listen to that advice—yes, of course he should listen to the advice of the officials—but also to listen to the debate.
The Minister said that the amendment would not add to the duties or the clarity for the electoral officials or the Electoral Commission, but I do not accept that. It would make it clear that the House expects such consideration for those who would otherwise potentially be denied the right to vote. As ever, the problem is not the intentions of the Electoral Commission. I have met its members on many occasions and their intentions are good, but the delivery has not been as good. The House has a responsibility to make clear our expectations in respect of access for disabled people. I referred specifically to people with sight difficulties and the importance of helping them.
I cannot see how the amendments tabled by me and by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger) could make the arrangements more complex or more difficult. The amendments are clear, but if there is any difficulty in that regard, and if the Minister wishes to improve the drafting in any way, he can easily do that on Report. I invite him to join us in the Lobby this afternoon, and if there are any such deficiencies, to put them right on Report. I shall be delighted to help and support him in doing that, should it be necessary, but let us make progress today.
I would very much like to pursue amendment 328, but as I do not want to take up too much of the time of the Committee, I shall press amendment 329 to a Division. Although I am disappointed by the Minister's response, I welcome the fact that he has at least endorsed the principles that we advanced in this short debate.
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment made: 168, page 15, line 37, at end insert—
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Alun Michael
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 18 October 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
516 c665-6 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:15:23 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_669656
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_669656
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_669656