Local Electoral Administration and Registration Services (Scotland) Act 2006 (Consequential Provisions and Modifications) Order 2007

Another point is that the election cannot be illegal as prisoners are not eligible to vote. To turn to the noble Duke’s ninth question, he asked what confidence we had in electronic counting. The electronic counting system has been independently verified; the same system is used in GLA elections and comprehensive training and guidance are provided to electoral administrators. Finally—or not quite finally, because there are 11 questions—the noble Duke asked how much e-counting would cost. It is difficult to be precise because some costs will not be known until after the count has concluded and accounts are submitted to the Scotland Office. At this time, however, we estimate the costs at around £4.7 million. The noble Duke asked whether the corresponding number list would be publicly available. The answer is no; rule 71 prevents public inspection of the list and keeps ballot papers confidential, unless a court wishes to inspect them. I move on to the questions asked by the noble Lord, Lord Steel. He asked why it had taken so long to issue the consultation paper. It is on a complex and controversial area that required full consideration within government. I can confirm that statements made by David Cairns in press and media after the declaration of incompatibility judgment reflect accurately the Government’s view. The Government are not persuaded that lifting the blanket ban on prisoners is the best way forward in these circumstances, but we must take account of the European judgment and initiate a public debate and reflection on the present position. I was asked why the JCSI’s report on the order highlights that it represents an unexpected and unusual use of power under Section 12 of the Scotland Act. The JCSI brought to Parliament’s attention that the order contains certain provisions that carry forward the blanket ban on prisoners voting contained in the Representation of the People Act 1983, which had been judged to be not ECHR compliant. The view of the JCSI is that Parliament would normally expect that the power to make any subordinate legislation would be exercised in a way that is compatible with ECHR. It is, therefore, unexpected that this order is being exercised in this way. However, the JCSI has also indicated that it does not think the provisions of the order are unlawful. The noble Lord, Lord Steel, asked about the ballot paper and whether the names of nominated regional candidates will be displayed in polling stations. Details of all regional candidates will be clearly displayed in the polling stations. The lists will also be sent to all postal voters with their postal ballot papers. The noble Lord also asked about multi-party descriptions and whether, for example, Alex Salmond’s name could be used on ballot papers that were not for the constituency in which he was standing. That would be possible as long as the description used on the ballot papers was one of the 12 descriptions registered by the party. However, it would appear as the party description and not the candidate’s name.