Electoral Administration Bill

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman who, like me, has observed elections. I have headed the short-term observation missions to 18 elections, most of which have been pretty awful, but we have never been denied access. We walk into a polling station and the officials there either welcome us or look like animals facing the headlights and cringe, but they do not say, ““You can’t come in here.”” It was hard to believe that clause 33 stated that before international or domestic observers were allowed into a polling station, they had to get the approval of the returning officer. If anyone had tried to stop me going into a polling station in Ukraine, Georgia, the Balkans or Russia, it would have been item No. 1 in the report that I read out the following day. I would have asked, ““How on earth can we verify that elections meet international standards if we were not allowed into the polling station?”” That is what would have happened as a result of clause 33. Not only would international and domestic observers have been subject to the whim of the returning officer, but even the Electoral Commission, which plays an enormous role in elections, as I am sure the Department was aware, would have had to bow its head, go down on its knees and say, ““Please allow us in to observe this election.”” Well, the Department came up trumps. As a result, the six and a half pages were almost completely rewritten, to my satisfaction and to the satisfaction of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. So now we are on a par with Kazakhstan, something of which we should be immensely proud, and even with Belarus, which conducts appalling elections but still allows in observers. They may have to stand 10 ft away and not be able to see the counting, but at least they are allowed in. The changes are welcome. They mean that observers can gain access to all stages of the election process. If there is to be a limit on numbers, let us be clear that it will not in any way inhibit the right of observers, international or domestic, to attend. People say that the hall might get too full. In Ukraine, the first and second elections two years ago were totally crooked. One of the methods used to limit the opposition in those areas in which they were strong was to hold the election in a constricted place, because people simply leave if there is a crowd—although that is better than the situation in Iraq, where bombs were dropped on queues in order to deter people. If a returning officer says, ““I am sorry, but we cannot let in five or 10 observers””, they have arranged for the election to take place in a polling station that is not fit for purpose. One of my best amendments, which I was quite pleased with, was rejected. It stated that the Electoral Commission should have regard to particular documents—I listed 10 of them—in determining a code of conduct. However, the Electoral Commission has said that that point will be covered in subordinate legislation. Two weeks ago, I took part in a conference on the UN declaration of principles for international election observation, which will be in the subordinate legislation. It is amazing how many people were oblivious to the fact that domestic and international observers were prohibited. In a bizarre exchange, the then Foreign Secretary, who is now Leader of the House, roundly castigated Zimbabwe for running fraudulent elections and criticised it, quite correctly, for refusing to allow certain election observers to observe that fraudulent election. I felt compelled to point out to him the fact, of which he was oblivious, that while he rightly condemned Zimbabwe, he should appreciate that it generally allows in international observers, while we do not. Thankfully, that situation is history, so when I criticise the Russians or anybody else on how they conduct their elections, I will not have the point thrown into my face that I have no right to criticise because we do not allow in international observers. In conclusion, I am delighted that clause 33 has been almost completely rewritten, and I am sure that the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights will be happy. When the time comes, I am sure that one of the first countries to test our new procedures on election observers will be that great democracy adjacent to Russia, Belarus, which will see whether we allow in observers and press the legislation to the full. However, I have seen the amendments, of which I almost totally approve, which will allow us to tell them that we know that they allow in international observers to their undemocratic political system. One of the birthplaces of parliamentary democracy, the United Kingdom, after 200 years of struggling to be more democratic, now allows in international observers, which will allow the whole process of transparency to come at long last to this country. I am grateful to the Minister and her predecessor, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman), for listening to reason. That shows that the Government occasionally listen, and I am prepared to stand up and applaud them.