UK Parliament / Open data

Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill

In response to the amendment, the noble Lord, Lord Lipsey, has indicated that I might send him home happy. I hope that in the spirit of the remarks I am about to make he will still go to his Christmas retreat a happy man. As the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, said, the amendment as drafted would not necessarily meet the point, but I hope that I can give the noble Lord, Lord Lipsey, and other noble Lords who have supported him, some clear reassurance. The amendment is unnecessary because in Schedule 10 to the Bill, on page 294—which I hope we will get to one day—it is stated at paragraph 6(2C) that under rule 47: "““A ballot paper on which the voter makes any mark which … is clearly intended to indicate a particular preference for a particular candidate, but … is not a number (or is a number written otherwise than as an arabic numeral), shall be treated in the same way as if the appropriate number (written as an arabic numeral) had been marked instead””." I hope that that addresses the issue. If there is one X, it will be very clear. The important point is that the returning officer has discretion to make a judgment as to whether a clear intention has been made. That is why two Xs would not demonstrate a clear intention. I believe that one X would demonstrate a clear intention and that is provided for in the rules.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
723 c950 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top