Political Parties and Elections Bill

I offer a few words before the Minister responds. Like my noble friend Lady Gould, I agree with so much of the principle that lay behind what was said by the noble Lord, Lord Tyler. In particular, I agreed with what he said about party representatives and the others. The Bill makes it clear that the party representatives are intended to be a minority of the total commission. Clearly, they must all work together. They would not work together very well if the party nominees regarded themselves as representatives of parties, let alone representatives of the party leader. I agree with the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, on that. However, like my noble friend Lady Gould, I am doubtful about the amendments. I realise that the noble Lord had to table amendments to enable discussion about the Bill, but with the best will in the world, and no doubt he has looked at the drafting carefully, the wording of his amendments to Clause 5 is not apt at all. Perhaps that is being a little harsh. Paragraph (a) would ""ensure that the nominated person has relevant experience in the conduct of elections"," and so forth, But that is much too narrow. It would no doubt be delightful and excellent to have someone of the huge experience of the noble Lord, Lord Rennard, and if that could be equated in the other parties, that would be fine, but that is only one version of what is meant by, ""relevant experience in the conduct of elections and the organisation of political parties"." I think that is much too narrow. It would be delightful and excellent no doubt to have someone of the huge experience of the noble Lord, Lord Rennard. If that could be equated in the other parties, that is fine—but that is only one version of what is meant by, ""relevant experience in the conduct of elections and the organisation of political parties"." That is really much too narrow. Others have commented on diversity. I very much agreed with the cartel points that seemed to resonate through my mind when the noble Lord, Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville, spoke. But diverse does not necessarily mean what has been intended. I am familiar with the fact that in recent changes made by the Government in judicial appointments emphasis has been made on diversity to ensure that more people enter the judiciary who are not white and more women than we have had in the past, particularly at the higher levels. That, I suppose, is what the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, means—but on the face of it, it could mean "diverse representation" from those experienced in the conduct of elections for the European Parliament in devolved parliaments and local government. It could mean diversity across a whole range of fields; diverse does not necessarily have the meaning that the noble Lord seeks to give it, so I think that paragraph (b) is too vague. For a whole number of reasons, but principally for the one enunciated by my noble friend Lady Gould of Potternewton, it would not be appropriate to try to do this in the Bill, even though a much better outcome could be reached than the original wording chosen by noble Lords opposite.