Subordinate Legislation
Representation of the People<br />(Postal Voting for Local Government Elections) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations (Draft)
Item 2 is a Scottish statutory instrument that is subject to the affirmative procedure. I welcome Bruce Crawford, the Minister for Parliamentary Business, and ask him to accept my apologies for the delay.
It is good to see you back in post, minister—you were missed at certain points in the chamber last week, but Michael McMahon did a grand job on your behalf.
I welcome Stephen Sadler, who is head of elections and local governance; Andy Sinclair, who is a senior policy officer in the referendum and elections division; and Colin Brown, who is a senior principal legal officer. Does the minister wish to make brief introductory remarks?
Thank you, convener. I am sure that I tutored Michael McMahon well in saying, "Formally moved"—it was a fantastic job for him.
Thank you for inviting me to the committee today to address these issues. I will make a few opening remarks.
The draft regulations will implement measures that were introduced by the Local Electoral Administration and Registration Services (Scotland) Act 2006. They are part of a package of regulations to facilitate the introduction of absent-voter identifiers for local government elections in Scotland.
Postal voting is, as we all know, geared towards helping those who are unable to attend to vote on an election day. It is a convenient way to contribute to the overall turnout of the electorate. Whatever we do in making regulations, we must try not to create unnecessary barriers to enabling people to vote. The package of instruments introduces what we believe are fairly simple measures that are aimed at combating electoral fraud while not creating any unnecessary obstacles for postal voters to overcome.
We propose that in the future, voters who apply for an absent vote will simply be asked to provide a signature and a date of birth. I stress that we do not believe that electoral fraud is a problem in Scotland, but we cannot be complacent. We fully recognise the need for safeguards against any attempt to vote fraudulently, so these simple regulations will put such safeguards in place.
The instrument sets out the process by which personal identifiers are collected, and how they are to be used to check the validity of returned postal votes. The regulations require that applicants for postal votes must include a signature and date of birth, although an exception can be made for voters who suffer from a disability or an inability to read or write.
The intention among returning officers in Scotland, in line with practice in England and Wales, is that personal identifiers will be checked using computer software. The systems will scan the postal vote statement that is returned with the postal vote paper, and cross-reference it with the control signature and date of birth that have been provided previously. The returning officer will then examine the two sets of identifiers side by side to establish whether they correlate.
I do not need to say much more, given our timescale today, other than to say a few words about the 20 per cent figure for mandatory checking. That exists to ensure that there is consistency of process across all elections. The figure of 20 per cent is statistically robust for sample checking, and will provide a good indicator of whether fraud is occurring. The regulations make it clear that if a returning officer considers from checking the sample that there is a real risk of fraud, they can specify that all postal voting statements must be checked.
The figure of 20 per cent is the checking level for Scottish elections, European elections and UK elections. If we were to introduce a different percentage, that would create more of the fragmentation in the electoral process that Gould wishes us to avoid. That said, returning officers are encouraged to check 100 per cent of postal votes if circumstances allow, as has happened in the Greater London Authority for example, in which 100 per cent of postal voting identifiers were checked during the most recent elections, despite the law requiring a minimum check of only 20 per cent.
The regulations will bring Scottish local government elections and anti-fraud measures into line with other countries in the UK. I commend them to the committee.
We have had the benefit of previous discussions, briefings and papers, but members may have some questions for the panel.
I welcome the statutory instrument that has been laid before us today, but I want to have on the record a point of clarification. I do not want to be seen to set the hares running.
New regulation 24A(4) states:
"the returning officer must show"
rejected votes
"to the agents and must permit them to view the entries in the personal identifiers record which relate to the person to whom the postal ballot paper was addressed".
Will the provision allow agents to view signatures and dates of birth, but not votes, so that the secrecy of the ballot paper is not compromised in any way?
I confirm that that is the case.
I have a question about the opening of personal identifiers within the view of agents and candidates. In 2007, the local authority that conducted the elections in the area that I represent opened ballot papers almost daily without notifying candidates and agents. Will there be a way of ensuring that returning officers notify agents and candidates of when personal identifiers will be checked, so that they can be present to carry out the obligation that the regulation imposes?
I understand that the normal process is for agents and candidates to be notified every time ballots are opened. In the future, 20 per cent of ballots will be checked at every ballot opening, not just on one occasion.
Motion moved,
That the Local Government and Communities Committee recommends that the draft Representation of the People (Postal Voting for Local Government Elections) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2009 be approved.—[Bruce Crawford.]
Motion agreed to.
Absent Voting at Scottish Local Government Elections<br />(Provision of Personal Identifiers) Regulations 2009 (SSI 2009/35)
We will deal with the first of two instruments that are subject to the negative procedure and which relate to the future conduct of the Scottish local government elections. The minister and his officials are here to deal with any questions of clarification.
The Subordinate Legislation Committee has questioned whether part of SSI 2009/35 is within the Parliament's vires. Does the minister wish to comment on that point?
I wish to be helpful and to provide clarity early. You are right that the Subordinate Legislation Committee has suggested that there is doubt about whether it is intra vires for the Scottish minister to make some of the provisions in regulation 10. Any doubt about vires is a serious matter. Having considered the committee's comments, I decided that a further order should be made to put the matter beyond doubt. That order was laid yesterday.
At issue is the use of the personal identifiers record, which records the personal identifiers of absent voters—their dates of birth and signatures. Regulation 10 will insert a provision stipulating how long a person's identifiers must be retained after they cease to be an absent voter. If there is to be any fraud investigation after a poll, for example, it is essential that records are available. Regulation 10 also provides that returning officers may disclose the information in the record to candidates or agents attending postal ballot proceedings. The intention of the provision is to enable the record to be viewed by candidates and agents, so that they can check whether the returning officer is accepting or rejecting postal ballot papers correctly.
I do not accept that regulation 10 is ultra vires, and I am as confident as I can be that the regulations as drafted are fit for purpose. I note that the Subordinate Legislation Committee acknowledged that the point is debatable. However, when it comes to electoral law, there is a requirement on all of us to put any issue beyond doubt. That is why I made a further order yesterday to ensure that no doubt remains about whether the returning officer can provide the information. I hope that all members will welcome that. I commend the regulations to the committee.
Do members agree that the committee does not wish to make any recommendation in relation to the instrument?
Members indicated agreement.
Scottish Local Government Elections Amendment Order 2009 (SSI 2009/36)
Members have received a copy of the order and have expressed no concerns about the proposals that it contains. Do members agree that the committee does not wish to make any recommendation in relation to the order?
Members indicated agreement.
Non-Domestic Rates (Levying) (Scotland) Regulations 2009 (SSI 2009/42)
Members have received a copy of the regulations, which are subject to the negative procedure, and have expressed no concerns about the proposals that they contain. Do members agree that the committee does not wish to make any recommendation in relation to the regulations?
Members indicated agreement.
Thank you, minister. I apologise once again for the delay.
No problem.
That concludes today's business. We have another heavy agenda next week, when we will hear from Nicola Sturgeon and local authorities.
Meeting closed at 13:05.