Representation of the People Bill

Lord Janvrin Excerpts

2nd reading
Monday 14th September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Janvrin (CB)]

My Lords, I find myself in agreement with the introductory two points from the noble Lord, Lord Markham. I shall try to be brief. My particular interest in the Bill is in the changes proposed to our electoral registration system. This stems from being, six years ago, a member of a committee which undertook post-legislative scrutiny of the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013. The committee drew attention to the obvious fact that large numbers of eligible voters are missing from our electoral registers, and we recommended at that time that improving the accuracy and completeness of the registers should be given government priority. Six years later, the problem is only much worse.

As others have drawn attention to, the Electoral Commission research suggests that a staggering 8 million people across the United Kingdom are not registered to vote. Like others, I therefore welcome the intent, as recommended by our committee six years ago, to pilot new and automated methods of voter registration to remove barriers and make it easier to register. These systems are in widespread use in other countries; the technology exists. I ask the Minister about a timetable for moving forward on this. It is an urgent problem, but solutions can be found if the will is there.

Let me turn briefly—and I will try to be brief—to some of the other provisions in the Bill. On political donations, I welcome the Government’s intention to tighten the rules, and I look forward to the extensive discussion, as is evidenced by this debate, on how best to do this and to take account of the Rycroft review. I add that I support the intention in the Bill to strengthen the independence and effectiveness of the Electoral Commission. It has a vital role to play, and I ask the Minister whether she is satisfied that the commission has the resources to carry out effectively the many tasks now assigned to it.

I have doubts on lowering the voting age, but it is a manifesto commitment, and I can see that a case can be made to improve democratic engagement in this way. Those still in education can more readily be taught about why voting matters, and a commitment adopted early in life may stick. But this can only possibly make sense, as many others have said, if sufficient real resources are made available to schools and colleges to accompany this change.

I welcome the fact that the Bill recognises that electoral interference from hostile overseas actors remains a real threat. I was a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee, which produced a Russia report in 2019. This murky domain is constantly evolving, and we are right to take it very seriously.

As other noble Lords have said, we live at a time of unprecedented uncertainty, when democracy and the rule of law are in retreat around the world. We in this country are reminded daily that public trust in our ancient, hard-won and precious democratic construct is at a low ebb. As others have said, this is a real challenge of our times. Ensuring that electoral processes are free, fair and fit for purpose is one necessary way of addressing this challenge. I welcome the Bill.

King’s Speech

Lord Janvrin Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd July 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Janvrin (CB)]

My Lords, I want to focus my remarks on the constitution. I start by noting that, in the Labour manifesto, constitutional reform found its place in the chapter entitled “Restoring public service in Westminster”. I commend that wider ambition, which is about trust in our system. We are all agreed that renewing trust has never been more important.

Where have we got to in the King’s Speech? I personally accept that the removal of the hereditary Peers is probably a sensible and incremental step for any Government intent on modernising the House of Lords. Many hereditary Peers are close colleagues and their individual contributions are consistently impressive, but I think they know, as we probably all do, that, collectively, they have been on borrowed time for 25 years. This measure will slightly reduce the size of the House and ensure a slightly better gender balance, but there is much more to be done on both those counts.

I add one small, additional point. I have very occasionally heard it argued that removing the remaining hereditary element of our legislature risks undermining the hereditary institution of monarchy. This argument does not stand up to a moment’s scrutiny—the roles are obviously entirely different.

In the manifesto, but not in the King’s Speech, is reform of the House of Lords appointments process. It may be that strengthening the vetting powers of the House of Lords Appointments Commission—HOLAC —could be achieved without legislation, as could an acceptance that HOLAC recommendations are binding. I hope, however, that in due course legislation can be introduced to put the essential work of HOLAC on a statutory basis. The arguments for doing so are well known.

Why is it important? The present system of appointments to the House of Lords is widely seen by the general public as being about unattractive, and occasionally unacceptable, political patronage. That power of patronage is seen as a tool of party management and party fundraising. I suggest that a Government with a large majority could afford to take risks in limiting this power. It is also another way to restore trust in our political system. There is more to be done.

The area which is neither in the manifesto nor the King’s Speech is the importance of proper scrutiny of secondary legislation. This is hardly a surprise. There are few votes to be had in trying to explain that Parliament lacks the teeth to scrutinise much of the legislation that governs our lives, even if the pitch is spiced with references to Henry VIII or skeleton Bills. However, key democratic principles are at stake. Effective scrutiny makes better law. Parliament’s fundamental constitutional role to hold the Executive to account is weakened by present arrangements.

I congratulate the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General on his excellent maiden speech in which, to my surprise and admiration, he mentioned secondary legislation. I urge him to study the two recent Lords reports on this issue, which highlight what is a democratic deficit in our system of legislation. As with House of Lords appointments, there is scope here for putting wider public interest above party self- interest or executive expediency. There is much more to be done.

I finish where I started. Restoring trust in the way we are governed has never been more important. Constitutional reform has a vital role to play in this, but there is more, much more, to be done.