house of lords official report - United Kingdom Parliament

1167 Political Parties and Elections Bill [LORDS] Political Parties and Elections Bill 1168
for personal identification is natural. They are so used
to it that they do not think that this matter should be
controversial. Frankly, at this time of night we are not
going to have a substantial debate, but we may well
wish to return to this issue at Third Reading. I hope
that the Minister will give some thought to what could
be done, because there is a genuine concern that if we
are to move in this direction we need to ensure that it
works as effectively as it does in Northern Ireland.
Lord Bach: My Lords, the amendment would require
electors to produce evidence of their identity in order
to be issued with a ballot paper at a polling station in
an election. The purpose is to strengthen the security
of the voting process at polling stations. Of course,
voting at polling stations has traditionally been conducted
without the need for any personal identification to be
produced.
However, as we have been told, it is an offence to
attempt to vote in place of another elector. That is
personation. The Electoral Commission has provided
guidance for returning officers on the actions that
polling station staff should take if they suspect that a
person requesting a ballot paper is not who they claim
to be. It has encouraged returning officers to supply
copies of this guidance to all presiding officers. The
commission and the Association of Chief Police Officers
have also worked together to produce guidance for
police officers on how they should respond to any
incidents of personation at polling stations.
10 pm
Any proposal to require voters in polling stations in
Great Britain to produce ID as envisaged under the
amendment would need very careful consideration.
Though the amendment provides for a wide range of
documents that may be produced as evidence of identity
at polling stations, the Government remain of the
view that requiring identification might present
considerable barriers to voting at elections for some
individuals. I note from the Electoral Commission’s
briefing note that it is also of this view, stating:
“While we would welcome such consultation, we believe that
the benefits of moving to a system of ID in polling stations would
need to be carefully considered before deciding on whether legislation
should be introduced, so as to examine the risk that it could
disenfranchise some electors”.
The requirement to produce evidence of identity
would be a significant change; we must ensure that
any approach is aligned with other reforms to the
registration and electoral processes that are a part of
this Bill. It would be premature at this stage to introduce
identifiers in order to vote before we have had the
chance to scrutinise the feasibility and any subsequent
effectiveness of moving to a system that requires identifiers
to be produced in order to register to vote.
It is perhaps worth mentioning the recent information
published on 1 May by ACPO and the Electoral
Commission, which allows us for the first time to
examine the extent and nature of allegations of electoral
malpractice. From the information published, it is
evident that there were 13 alleged cases of personation
at the 2008 elections, with no further action being
taken in at least six of these cases. While any instance
of personation is unacceptable, these figures must be
seen in the context of the 16 million votes that were
cast at those elections. Any response must be
proportionate.
Our view is that, while not rejecting this out of
hand, the available evidence does not justify the potential
barriers to voting that the measure proposed by noble
Lords might well put in place. This Government are
prepared to take forward significant reform of the
electoral system as, I hope, the introduction of individual
registration clearly demonstrates. The approach we
have taken to ensure that we strengthen the integrity
of the system on a step-by-step basis, in the light of
available evidence, in a way that does not disfranchise
those electors who are entitled to cast their vote, is the
right one. We do not think this amendment fits in with
that. The great worry is that people will turn up at the
polling station without any identification and then be
turned away. That is the problem that we need to
overcome. That is what I have to say on the matter on
behalf of the Government tonight. I invite the noble
Lord to withdraw his amendment.
Lord Henley: My Lords, I do not think that that
was satisfactory. I am minded to consider what to do
about it in due course. At three minutes past 10, I will
spare the noble Lord a Division on this matter, because
I suspect that the response that we might get might not
be representative of the feelings of the House.
I think that there is a problem here. I have certainly
been advised that there is one. I do not think that it
would be a problem for people to bring some form
of identification. Most people have some form of
identification of one sort or another on them most of
the time. We suspect the Government want ultimately
to make that compulsory by bringing in ID cards. The
noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, denies this and shakes
his head. However, we know that ID cards are on the
way. At least, the Government seem to think that they
are on the way; I am not sure that they will ever
happen.
I will not go any further. The response was
unsatisfactory. I will consider what we shall do with
this matter. For the moment, I beg leave to withdraw
the amendment.
Amendment 103 withdrawn.
Clause 29 : Obligatory provision of identifying
information
Amendments 104 to 111
Moved by Lord Bach
104: Clause 29, page 30, line 34, after “above” insert “or by
virtue of subsection (4C) above”
105: Clause 29, page 31, line 12, after “above” insert “or by
virtue of subsection (1C) above”
106: Clause 29, page 31, line 47, after “above” insert “or by
virtue of subsection (2C) above”
107: Clause 29, page 32, line 23, leave out from “keeper” to “,
following” in line 24
108: Clause 29, page 32, line 36, at end insert “or checking a
person’s entitlement to be registered in such a register”