Electoral Administration Bill

The hon. Lady is right to say that there have been some improvements and there are some improvements in the Bill, but the overwhelming voice of opinion—from people other than her and a few of her colleagues—is against what she is saying and in favour of individual voter registration and personal identifiers. It is extremely worrying and sad that the Government will not accept that. Even she has to admit that it is alleged that people who were in Pakistan voted in the local elections in Coventry. That is an obvious allegation of impersonation. It really is not good enough for her to say complacently, ““Oh well, we’ve solved the problem”” when the fact of the matter is that the allegations continue. As I said last time we debated the issue, there are eight election petitions currently ongoing. The Electoral Commission argued in its document ““Voting for Change”” that it was necessary to have individual voter registration and individual identifiers such as signatures and dates of birth. Its advice—it is an independent body, set up by the Government for that purpose—was pretty clear. In November, I asked the Minister whether she would let me see the actual responses the Government’s consultation, ““Electoral Administration: A Policy Paper For Discussion””. The responses were placed in the Library this Monday and they make interesting reading. The hon. Member for Linlithgow and East Falkirk (Michael Connarty) said that he felt"““particularly strongly that registration should be verified by personal signature.””" The London borough of Merton—at that time Labour—said that the introduction of individual identifiers"““has to be supported by anyone wishing to ensure that the security and confidence in the electoral system is maintained and enhanced.””" The metropolitan borough of Bury—Labour—said:"““The introduction of individual registration, with the provision for electors to supply a signature and a date of birth would be fundamental in reducing electoral fraud.””" The borough of Telford and Wrekin—Labour—said:"““We support the use of signatures and dates of birth as individual identifiers””." Adam Gray, a former Labour councillor and the Labour party’s election agent in the London borough of Wandsworth said:"““In respect of identifiers I strongly favour one rule for all electors so if postal voters are required to have an identifier, there is no reason why polling station voters should not be required to have one as well. While you””—" that is, the Government—"““say that there is no evidence to suggest that personation at polling stations is a significant problem, it is of course the case that the overwhelming majority of electoral fraud instances have pertained to personation at polling stations, NOT postal vote personation””."