Today, the House of Commons will be debating and voting on individual electoral registration. This may seem a very dry subject but it is of critical importance. It is all about how and whether people are included on the electoral register. It is important because if people are not on the electoral register, then they cannot exercise their democratic right to vote.

Let me be clear: individual electoral registration is a sound principle which was championed by Labour when in power. In a modern democracy it is important to have an accurate and complete electoral register and IER places a responsibility on individuals rather than relying on the so-called head of household to complete and return electoral registration forms. But this is not what has motivated the government.

In the autumn, the government produced its draft bill and white paper on IER. These contained two proposals which attracted considerable opposition. First, the government proposed that individuals could ‘opt out’ of reminders to complete a registration form. This meant that, in effect, someone could permanently opt out of being on the electoral register.

The second issue which loomed large was the proposal to make registration a ‘lifestyle choice’. In other words, registration was no longer to be regarded as a civic duty and non-cooperation by an individual was not to result in any kind of fine.

The government has dropped both of these proposals and this is to be welcomed. But nobody should be lulled into a false sense of security. There remains in the government’s bill a number of other proposals which are of great concern. Although they might be more subtle than the measures which have been dropped, and they are unlikely to make media headlines, they are nevertheless real and very worrying.

Foremost among our remaining concerns is the proposal to introduce the new electoral register by December 2015. What is the significance of this date? Well, this is when the next parliamentary bundary review will be conducted and according to earlier legislation which the coalition pushed through, parliamentary constituencies have to have more or less the same number of electors. Geography, continuity and community interest are now marginal considerations. Even when the changes the government have conceded are factored in, the likelihood is that the government’s version of IER will mean significantly fewer people being on the register, and it is the elderly, the young, those who move home frequently, people from ethnic communities, the disabled, and those living in rented accommodation who are least likely to be on the register. In other words, many of the people who perhaps need the power of the vote more than most and are less likely to vote Conservative.

With these proposals the 2015 boundary review is likely to benefit rural areas at the expense of urban, and the Conservatives at the expense of Labour.

There are other worrying aspects to this bill, not least the powers it gives to ministers to abolish the annual canvass, the downgrading of the role of the impartial Electoral Commission, the absence of monitoring of the transition to IER and the decision not to ringfence funding, the lack of clarity about proxy and postal votes being carried forward, and the refusal of the government to publish an implementation plan and its secondary legislation. This last point is important because with IER much of the ‘devil is in the detail’. For example, the House of Commons is being presented with a commitment to introduce civil penalties for non-registration without being told how much the fine would be. Obviously the size of the fine will be key to ensuring whether it will be an effective incentive for people to register.

For these reasons, Labour believes that while the most obviously dangerous aspects of the bill have been removed, the bill, as it stands, is far from being fair and impartial. IER is a sound principle; it reflects modern-day society and should, if implemented properly, create a more accurate and inclusive electoral register. But the proposals by the government remain shot-through with Conservative self-interest and need to be modified radically before they can command Labour’s support.

—————————————————————————————

Wayne David is MP for Caerphilly and shadow minister for political and constitutional reform

—————————————————————————————

Photo: lamont_cranston