I suspect that we are discussing a subject about which all hon. Members believe themselves to be experts. We all have our experiences of it. I have been a candidate in 21 elections and successful in 20—such is the life of a politician in Northern Ireland. I have participated in elections under three different voting systems and witnessed numerous changes in electoral law.
I broadly welcome the Government’s intentions in the Bill but, like many others, I believe that it is too modest by far and that they will be forced to revisit some of the issues before too long. I join other hon. Members in welcoming the role that the Electoral Commission will play. It has played a significant role in Northern Ireland. Its contribution, not least in funding for political parties’ policy development, has been especially helpful for the smaller parties in the United Kingdom. The Electoral Commission plays a complementary role to the Electoral Office for Northern Ireland. The whole of Northern Ireland is under one electoral officer and his staff.
Like several hon. Members, I feel strongly that good registration is the key to the Bill’s three main purposes. I fear that the Electoral Office for Northern Ireland is not properly resourced to do the job that it needs to do. Many of us have experiences of forms that are sent out but never followed up. If a form is not returned, all too often, the Electoral Office makes no second attempt to get it. It is a matter of the resources that are available to it and the staff whom it can employ for that purpose. Significant work needs to be done on that.
As I see it, the Bill’s three main purposes are: access to voting for all; the highest possible turnout, and the lowest possible fraud. As I said in an earlier intervention, those can be competing aims. The aspiration for a more accurate and fuller register is one aspect that the three purposes have in common but many other facets constitute competing aims.
In Northern Ireland, we are, ironically, at a more advanced stage because of the high level of voting fraud. Full details can be found in the report on this subject by the Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs. Northern Ireland formerly experienced voter fraud on a massive scale, constituting systematic abuse of the electoral system, which ultimately led to the Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002. Most of us who witnessed the resultant elections believe that, although there may be some outstanding issues, especially in relation to postal voting, the legislation has broken the back of electoral fraud in Northern Ireland. I therefore say to those who experience similar circumstances to those that existed in Northern Ireland, that I perceive the 2002 Act as at least part of the remedy to the problems. However, ultimately, hon. Members will have to gauge the extent to which electoral fraud is a problem in Britain and decide whether they need to look to the remedies that were used in Northern Ireland.
Lessons can be learned from our experience in Northern Ireland. Fraud, even on a small scale, can change the outcome of elections.
Electoral Administration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Peter Robinson
(Democratic Unionist Party)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 25 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Electoral Administration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
438 c242-3 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:08:24 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269471
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269471
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269471