It gives me great pleasure to support the new clause tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for South Staffordshire (Sir Patrick Cormack). Indeed, my hon. and right hon. Friends and I have put our names to it. It is extremely necessary.
This constitutional difficulty became clear because of the sad death of a candidate. My hon. Friend reiterated that this evening, as he did very well when we debated this point on Second Reading. We should not forget that we would not be having this discussion had this anomaly not been brought to our notice by that sad death.
However, we should all support these proposals—I am pleased that the Minister has indicated the Government’s support for the new clause—because the anomaly that left us without my hon. Friend for several weeks after the general election could, as he has just so eloquently put it, in different circumstances cause serious constitutional difficulties in this place. It is fortunate that we have this opportunity to put the matter right.
On first reading, the newly drafted new clause 3 and consequent amendments are not the simple proposals that my hon. Friend the Member for South Staffordshire brought forward when he first introduced the idea. After carefully reading through the Government’s thorough draftsmanship, however, I have realised that in seeking to close a loophole we must be careful not to allow further loopholes. As various Members have said this evening, what would happen should an unforeseen situation arise? While no legislation can foresee all the circumstances that it is intended to remedy, should the remedy be required, it seems that the thorough drafting takes into consideration all the situations that we can currently envisage that might cause a constitutional problem.
The hon. Member for South Staffordshire is absolutely correct in wanting to change the situation whereby new candidates would be allowed to stand, or candidates would be substituted, in an election that would result under the legislation. If there is to be a proper replication of a general election, it must be exactly as it would have been on the day of the general election, except for the absence of the person who has sadly died. The complicated wording is therefore necessary to ensure that that occurs correctly.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Staffordshire is also absolutely correct to distinguish between an independent candidate and the Speaker, were the Speaker to be involved in such a situation, because the situation is not the same as for a candidate who represents a party. If we are seeking to replicate a general election, it is essential that that distinction should be included.
Clearly, the loophole that led to the absence of the hon. Member for South Staffordshire for so many weeks after the general election should be closed. Unlike on many other parts of the Bill, the Committee is in complete agreement. I therefore commend the new clause to the Committee.
Electoral Administration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Laing of Elderslie
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 8 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Electoral Administration Bill 2005-06.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c275-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:52:06 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273343
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273343
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273343