Political Parties and Elections Bill

I am grateful for the Minister’s reply and for the other contributions to this short discussion on this important matter. This is our opportunity to try to shed a bit of light on the circumstances in which particular orders will be used. I shall test that a little further, although it may have to be dealt with in the Minister’s response to the next group. If he can deal with it now, that would be interesting. The Minister referred to the commission’s assertion that it would effectively have four tests—the first being body of evidence, the second, public interest, the third, cost of investigation and, four, any other factors. The element of discretion is in that last point. Would the financial circumstances or standing of the institution, or organisation or individual, be one of those factors that could be taken into account? The objective—and it is very important for the commission’s work—is to be able to move very quickly to stop problems and put out small fires, rather than have big fires that get wrapped up in the courts and go on for ever and ever, as the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, said. Can we have some clarity on where the dividing line is between the different choices of the clubs in the commission’s bag? I would be grateful if the Minister could say a little more on the ability of the commission to take into account local pressures. I may have misheard that or misplaced the context, but could the Minister expand a little on what he was referring to there?