UK Parliament / Open data

Constitutional Law

Proceeding contribution from David Mundell (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 24 November 2010. It occurred during Legislative debate on Constitutional Law.
No, I want to make some progress. I also want to leave time for the many Members from Scotland to make their contributions to the debate. I want to comment on the four points about the draft order that were raised by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments. First, article 2 of the order defines the term ““European parliamentary election”” without that term being used in the text of the order. Secondly, rule 20(3)(a) in schedule 2 includes among the minor errors that returning officers can correct in nomination papers"““errors as to a person's electoral number””." However, unlike the nomination papers for election to this House, the nomination papers for Scottish parliamentary elections do not contain proposers' electoral numbers, thus rendering the reference unnecessary. Both those errors, while regrettable, have no effect on the operation of the order. My officials will ensure that returning officers are aware that the reference to electoral numbers can safely be ignored and that the unnecessary provisions will be removed at the first suitable opportunity to amend the order. Thirdly, the Committee also highlighted article 3(1), which deals with the disregarding of late alterations to the register of electors, and, fourthly, article 4(5), which deals with the effect of alterations to the register where there has been an appeal against a registration officer's decision. Those provisions have been set out in a substantially similar form in previous versions of the order since 2002, and so far as I know, they have not prejudiced voters or the effective administrations of previous elections. On reviewing those articles in light of the Committee's comments, we are of the view that there is an overlap with the provisions of the Representation of the People Act 1983 that renders those provisions unnecessary. Those points were not raised until after the draft order had been considered by the Electoral Commission and had been laid. We propose proceeding with the order in its current form, and we will revisit those provisions once we have the benefit of consulting with the Electoral Commission and other interested parties. As the equivalent provisions in previous orders have apparently not caused difficulty for voters or electoral administrators at previous elections, we do not anticipate any difficulty with those provisions as drafted.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

519 c382 

Session

2010-12

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top