Electoral Administration Bill

moved Amendment No. 10:"Page 61, line 5, leave out ““member of the House of Commons”” and insert ““holder of a relevant elective office unless he is not a member of a registered party and is either—" (a)   a member of the Scottish Parliament, or (b)   a member of a local authority in Scotland.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 10, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 11 to 18 inclusive. Perhaps I may start by explaining the reasoning behind this group of amendments. As noble Lords will be aware, the regulatory regime established by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 followed from the recommendations made by the Committee on Standards in Public Life, the then Neill committee, in 1998. Schedule 7 to that Act sets out, among many other things, the requirement that holders of elective office should report the donations they have received to the Electoral Commission, which will then publish them. That has the effect that MPs, MEPs, Members of devolved Administrations and local councillors throughout the United Kingdom have to report donations to both the Electoral Commission and the relevant Register of Members’ Interests of the body of which they are a Member. Transparency and accountability on the funding of holders of relevant offices are of crucial importance. Reporting donations that holders of elected office receive and publishing them are valuable and important activities, and we should do nothing to diminish that. However, many holders of these electoral offices take the view that such duplication is unnecessary. It can lead to confusion, and unintentional errors can sometimes be made in the reporting of donations. This group of amendments follows from amendments tabled in another place that applied only to MPs which received widespread support from all parts of another place. Those amendments became Clause 58 and removed the need for duplication in reporting from MPs only. When that clause was tabled, the Government gave a commitment to resolve to work with the devolved authorities on a solution to remove the requirement for all holders of elective office to report donations to the Electoral Commission. We have been successful, and I am pleased to present this group of amendments, as I promised we would. These amendments remove the requirement of dual reporting for MPs, MEPs, Welsh Assembly Members, Welsh and English local councillors, Members of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish local councillors who are members of a political party. They mean that holders of any relevant elected office would not have to report any donations received to the Electoral Commission, whether the donations were received in their role as a relevant elected officer or in their role as a member of a registered political party. However, the Electoral Commission will still be obliged to record any such details it receives from the relevant Registers of Members’ Interests. The commission will also continue to monitor compliance with the regulatory system set out in the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. However, it would have no role to play regarding the non-reporting of donations. The Register of Members’ Interests of the body that Members belong to will retain its functions on that issue. The provision will commence only once the Electoral Commission is content that the relevant authorities have in place sufficient arrangements to ensure that it is still able to maintain an accurate register. This amendment seems to us to strike the right balance between, on the one hand, requiring transparency in the donations made to holders of elective office and, on the other hand, removing the bureaucratic duplication of reporting requirements. I should add that the amendments I present today are supported by the Electoral Commission as well as by other relevant bodies including the Scottish Executive and the Standards Board for England. I beg to move. On Question, amendment agreed to.