Local Government and Communities Committee

Meeting date: Wednesday, October 26, 2016

Official Report 641KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Representation of the People (Postal Voting for Local Government Elections) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2016 [Draft]

I welcome everyone back. Under agenda item 3, the committee will take evidence on the draft regulations. I welcome back Joe FitzPatrick, the Minister for Parliamentary Business, and I welcome from the Scottish Government Louise Scott and Roddy Angus, who are elections policy advisers.

The draft regulations are laid under the affirmative procedure, which means that the Parliament must approve them before they can come into force. Following this evidence session, the committee will be invited to consider a motion to recommend approval.

I invite the minister to make a short opening statement. I understand that he will speak not just to this draft statutory instrument but to the draft Scottish Local Government Elections Amendment (No 2) Order 2016, which we will dispose of later.

Thank you for the opportunity to set out the Government’s position on the draft instruments that are before the committee. It is generally acknowledged that the May 2012 Scottish local government elections were well run, which is why we are making only relatively minor changes to the rules that will be used for next May’s elections. The main rules for local government elections are set out in the Scottish Local Government Elections Order 2011 and the Representation of the People (Postal Voting for Local Government Elections) (Scotland) Regulations 2009, and the draft instruments make only minor changes to those rules.

We will make a number of amendments that are mainly to reflect wider electoral changes, most of which were made for this year’s Scottish Parliament elections, such as setting a deadline of 5 pm on the day of the poll for the issue of replacements for lost or not received postal ballot papers, allowing postal ballot packs to be issued earlier and requiring the returning officer to record on a list the reasons why a postal voting statement was rejected.

We will make a number of technical changes that allow for more information to be provided to voters in polling stations on how to complete their ballot paper. Given that we use STV in local government elections, that seems appropriate. All the changes are detailed in the policy notes that accompany the draft instruments.

I will highlight one significant improvement that we are making. We will change the definition of personal expenses so that a candidate’s disability should not affect the amount that they can spend on campaigning. Some disabilities can result in candidates having to incur extra expenditure—for example, from the need to use taxis instead of public transport or from a requirement for a sign language interpreter. The change will mean that any costs that are directly attributable to a candidate’s disability no longer count towards their election expense limits.

I pay tribute to the work of the one in five campaign, which is a cross-party group that campaigns to encourage empowerment and increase political participation among disabled people in Scotland. Without its input, that amendment would probably not have been brought forward, so I thank the campaign for its help with that.

Although it does not form part of the draft instruments, I would like to mention the launch of the access to elected office fund. The fund, which is operated by Inclusion Scotland, will provide grants to individuals who are standing for selection as electoral candidates in their areas, to assist them with any additional costs that they have because of a disability. The Scottish Government has provided Inclusion Scotland with funding to operate and manage the scheme as well as to cover grant payments to individuals who wish to stand for election.

I am pleased to say that the fund is going well and that Inclusion Scotland has had more than 25 expressions of interest in it from all parts of the country. Inclusion Scotland is working with those individuals to take forward their applications and the applications will be decided on by an independent decision panel for the access to elected office fund, which is made up predominantly of disabled people and includes expertise about reasonable adjustments and the overcoming of physical, social and cultural barriers that disabled people face. The panel will include disabled former MSPs Dennis Robertson and Siobhan McMahon.

The important thing is that, in the future, any additional costs that are directly attributable to a candidate’s disability will not count towards their election expense limits. It is only right that everyone should have the same opportunity to be elected as a local councillor and that any extra cost that is directly attributable to a disability should not be counted.

I hope that the committee agrees that the draft instruments set out sensible rules for the running of the local government elections next May and I am happy to answer any questions that members have.

11:30  

Thank you. Do members have any questions?

I am not sure that my question relates directly to the instruments that are before us but, given that the minister went a bit beyond their scope, he might wish to respond, although I will understand it if he does not. The policy note mentions proxy voting. If someone has a temporary disability, they might apply for a proxy vote quite late. They might not have applied for a postal vote and they might want someone to vote for them so that they are not disenfranchised.

Do you have a comment to make on the fact that a medical person might have to sign the form? Would you expect a general practitioner to sign the form and not charge for doing so? If GPs charged people who have a temporary disability—I am thinking of something such as an infection in a wound that prevents someone from getting to a polling station—for signing the form in the way that they charge in relation to passport applications, that could disenfranchise people. GPs might even refuse to sign people’s forms.

We would normally expect people who use the emergency proxy system to be in hospital rather than people who are housebound for a particular reason. There is nothing in the legislation that says whether a GP can charge for a signature. I am afraid that I do not know whether that is set out in any of the health board regulations.

The committee might want to consider the issue further at some point.

We will look at that. Am I right in saying that an emergency postal vote would be available to somebody in such a situation?

For a postal vote, a person would have to know well in advance.

As Elaine Smith said, the issue does not fall within the scope of the instruments that are under consideration, so we will take the point away. The aim is to make sure that the maximum number of people can exercise their vote. If we can make improvements in any areas, we should look at them. We would need to consult stakeholders in councils, but we will consider the point.

That would be helpful.

As there are no other questions, we move to item 4, which is formal consideration of the draft Representation of the People (Postal Voting for Local Government Elections) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2016. There is now an opportunity to debate the motion on the regulations, should members wish to. Would anyone like to do that?

Members: No.

I therefore ask the minister to move motion S5M-01514.

Motion moved,

That the Local Government and Communities Committee recommends that the Representation of the People (Postal Voting for Local Government Elections) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2016 [draft] be approved.—[Joe FitzPatrick]

Motion agreed to.

---

Scottish Local Government Elections Amendment (No 2) Order 2016 [Draft]

We move to item 5. As I said under item 3, the minister made a statement on the regulations that we just considered and the draft Scottish Local Government Elections Amendment (No 2) Order 2016 together. As we have taken evidence on the order and have afforded members the opportunity to ask questions, I move to item 6, which is formal consideration of motion S5M-01515. Members have the opportunity to debate the motion on the order. Do members wish to do so?

Members: No.

I therefore ask the minister to move motion S5M-01515.

Motion moved,

That the Local Government and Communities Committee recommends that the Scottish Local Government Elections Amendment (No.2) Order 2016 [draft] be approved.—[Joe FitzPatrick]

Motion agreed to.

The committee will report on the outcome of its consideration of both instruments in due course. I thank the minister and his officials for giving evidence.

---

Representation of the People (Variation of Limit of Candidates’ Local Government Election Expenses) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2016 (SSI 2016/263)

---

Representation of the People (Absent Voting at Local Government Elections) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2016 (SSI 2016/264)

Item 7 is consideration of two instruments that have been laid under the negative procedure and which will come into force unless the Parliament votes in favour of a motion to annul them. Members will note that the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee considered that it did not need to draw the Parliament’s attention to the instruments on any grounds in its remit. No motions to annul the instruments have been laid. I invite members to comment on either of the instruments.

As members have no comments, I invite the committee to agree that it does not wish to make any recommendations in relation to the instruments. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

That is excellent. As previously agreed, we now move into private session.

11:35 Meeting continued in private until 12:59.