Present: Rt Hon Michael J Martin MP, Speaker, in the chair; Gwyneth Dunwoody MP, Chairman of the Transport, Local Government and the Regions Committee; Rt Hon Nick Raynsford MP, Minister for Local Government; Rt Hon A. J. Beith MP; Mrs Angela Browning MP; Rt Hon Gerald Kaufman MP; Humfrey Malins MP; Peter Viggers MP.

1  Membership: the Committee noted that responsibility for electoral law had been transferred from the Home Office to the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions. As a result, Mrs Dunwoody, as chairman of the relevant select committee, had replaced Mr Robin Corbett. In due course a Transfer of Functions Order would be made to replace the Home Secretary with the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions. The Speaker had appointed Mr Kaufman in place of Mr Barry Jones, who was no longer a Member of the House, and had re-appointed the remaining members of the Committee.

2  Arrangements for answering parliamentary questions: it was agreed that Mr Beith would continue to answer parliamentary questions on behalf of the Committee. It was noted that four questions for written answer had been tabled and answered. The Government had not acceded to a request made after the last meeting for a short place on the rota for oral questions. Members of the House were interested in asking about the Commission. A place on the questions rota would meet that need and underline the accountability of the Commission to Parliament. The Committee agreed to ask the Government again for a place of up to ten minutes in the rota for oral questions. It was noted that the Transport, Local Government and the Regions Committee might chose to take oral evidence in public once a year from the Electoral Commission.

[At this point, Sam Younger, Chairman, and Roger Creedon, Chief Executive, Electoral Commission, were invited to join the meeting]

3  Electoral Commission's five year plan 2001-02 to 2005-06 : the Committee considered the revised five year plan. The Chairman of the Commission (Mr Younger) said the plan was a fuller version of the "work in progress" considered by the Committee in February. Experience since then had shown that the Commission's regulatory duties were onerous, for the political parties and for the Commission. The parties had proved very cooperative, but there were still some issues to be worked through with them as well as in relation to "regulated donees". There was also a big agenda on modernising electoral law and practice. Both returning officers and parties had a striking appetite for reform, but the Commission would have to be careful about the pace of review, in order not to commit itself beyond its capacity to deliver.

Continuing, he said that responsibility for voter education had only been assumed by the Commission in July and its approach was still embyonic. Early indications from the research being conducted showed evidence that one reason people did not vote was because they did not understand the system. This was a key issue for the Commission, although voter disengagement was above all a matter for the political parties. Plans for absorbing the role of the Local Government Commission for England in April 2002 were on track. The LGCE would now join the Electoral Commission in its own building so the accommodation costs of the merger should be smaller than expected. As well as preparing for a possible national referendum, the Commission had an advisory role in mayoral referenda. In conclusion, Mr Younger commended the Plan to the Committee, but noted that the Commission was conscious that it needed to improve its targets and measures for the next version of the five year plan, due to be put before the Committee in February 2002.

In discussion, the following points were made:

a.  electoral law was still primitive and turnout was adversely affected by conditions which applied to the register and to postal and proxy voting;

b.  apathy was not the only reason for people deciding not to vote and some thought should be given to enabling people to record an abstention or alternative view on the ballot paper;

c.  local authorities were being encouraged to provide electronic points of access for their services and this should apply to voting, subject to protection from fraud;

d.  best practice in other countries should be studied, particularly in encouraging young people and people from ethnic minorities to vote;

e.  the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions was keen to explore ways of making voting easier and modernising procedures;

f.  more work needed to be done by the Commission in developing arrangements for evaluation of its performance (section 10 of the five year plan);

g.  the Commission should not adopt too cautious an approach to its wide range of responsibilities and adequate resources should be provided if it was not to be constrained from carrying out the necessary work;

h.  the Commission should estimate the scale of work likely to be involved in changes to the external boundaries for local authorities;

i.  attention should be paid to the form of the questions posed in mayoral referenda and the absence of a requirement for a home address to be given by those supporting the call for such a referendum;

j.  the Committee would be interested in the forthcoming scheme for policy development grants to political parties;

k.  the Commission should address the enforcement of the law on personation at elections, particularly in cases where the list system meant that a candidate needed only about 5% of the vote to be elected;

l.  the speed and quality of publication of the Commission's report on the June 2001 general election was impressive;

m.  as well as learning from practices in other countries, the Commission should be willing to assist other countries with less experience of running democratic elections and in so doing the Commission should maintain contact with other Westminster bodies with an interest in such work, such as the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.

In reply to point h, Mr Younger said that current resources for the Local Government Commission for England provided for a boundary review programme up to 2004 and that this scale of activity would not necessarily be continued after that date. He would reply in writing to the other points made (see Annex A).

The Committee approved the revised five year plan for the Commission to publish.

4  Resources for 2001-02: the Committee took note of the Commission's paper explaining that a contingencies fund advance might have to be sought to cover expenditure on a function which was not yet the statutory responsibility of the Commission. Authority for a supplementary estimate might be sought at the Committee's next meeting.

5  Deputy Electoral Commissioners: the Committee took note of the letter from the Chairman of the Commission and agreed that the maximum number of Deputy Electoral Commissioners should be set at six.

6  Any other business:

(i)  vetting of election addresses by the Post Office: in response to Mr Kaufman, Mr Younger said that the Commission was already in discussion with Consignia, who were uncomfortable with their responsibilities for the content of election addresses.

(ii)  party political broadcasts: Mr Younger said that the Commission had an advisory role under section 11 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 and was not concerned with the content of such broadcasts.

(iii)  British Airports Authority passes: several Members expressed concern at the Commission's approach to the registration of the passes and the valuation placed on them. Mr Younger said that Members of Parliament were regulated donees under Schedule 7 of the Act. There were issues to be discussed and the Commission would not seek to enforce the reporting requirements until the application of the law had been clarified.

(iv)  keeping Members informed of the Commission's activities: it was agreed that the breadth of the Commission's responsibilities made it hard to present its current activities and future plans in a readily-digestible way. Mr Younger was keen to find effective ways of keeping Members informed and would welcome a more public forum in which to demonstrate the Commission's accountability to Parliament, perhaps through Mrs Dunwoody's committee.