Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 101A: 101A: Clause 60, page 31, line 5, after ““Wales),”” insert— ““(a) in subsection (1) omit paragraphs (a) and (b) and after the words ““Wales and is”” insert the words ““the second Thursday in June.””; (b)”” The noble Lord said: This amendment is at the beginning of a string of amendments in this group, all of which refer to the notice that has to be given if the Government wish to change the date of the council elections in a year when there is a European election so that it takes place on the European election day—usually the second Thursday in June—instead of the first Thursday in May. The exception is Amendment No. 101A, which heads the group, to which I shall return. All the amendments reflect the view that it might be a good idea to have the two elections on the same day but that some notice needs to be given so that everybody knows what is going on, not least the candidates, the political parties, the electoral registration officers and the returning officers. There is a dispute over whether the period should be six months, which I understand the Government will propose in their amendments, or one year, as the Electoral Commission proposed—which in different ways some of my amendments suggest, as well as the amendments of my noble friend. We will have the interesting discussion over whether it should be six months or one year, but there is a general view that the period should be in the Bill. Amendment No. 101A is slightly more ambitious. It would be over-egging it to say that it was a probing amendment, but it floats an idea in the hope that that might generate a discussion outside the confines of this House. Three years ago the local elections took place on the same day as the European elections. It was a glorious May and June, and the experience of taking part in those local elections in that fine weather, with light evenings right up to nine o’clock at night and not having to go out canvassing or delivering leaflets in the depths of February, March or April on dark nights, was really delightful. From the point of view of encouraging participation in elections, it would be sensible if we thought about moving the ordinary election day to June. It might also increase turnout. That was certainly the experience in June 2004. Turnout was up in those elections and there were various reasons for it. There were four all-postal pilots, which detained your Lordships' House for some time before it agreed to them. They certainly increased the turnout a little in those areas where they took place. However, the turnout went up in other places as well. A comparison of the different regions, and of Scotland and Wales, and the different circumstances in those areas suggested that the increase in turnout was down to three things. Some of it was down to the all-postal pilots—perhaps about 5 per cent. Some of it was down to having the European elections and the local elections on the same day, so that those people who cared about local elections also went to vote in the European elections and those people who cared more about European elections found themselves also voting in local elections. That appeared to account for another 5 per cent. However, even in areas where neither of those things applied and where an ordinary election took place at the polling stations, the turnout was up by about 5 per cent. There was a clear indication of an underlying increase in turnout at those elections. I do not think that anybody has worked out exactly why it was, but I firmly believe that it was because the elections were in June. A lot more campaigning was taking place because of the better weather and better circumstances, and a lot more voters turned out. The Government are keen on increasing the turnout and think of all kinds of strange gimmicks which most of us think are pretty hopeless and do not work, or are dangerous, such as all-postal voting. However, moving the local elections four or five weeks into the summer would do that. It would not have an unfortunate effect on the running of local authorities. Local authorities managed perfectly well in 2004, with an annual meeting a month later, and I am sure they would do so again. I float the amendment as an idea rather than as a serious matter that I expect the Government to agree to immediately today. However, it is a move that we and the local government community, as it calls itself nowadays, should think about generally. I beg to move the amendment, to allow debate on the group.