Oral Answers to Questions

Gary Streeter Excerpts

Thursday 18th June 2015 Commons Chamber

[Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con)]

6. What assessment the Electoral Commission has made of the neutrality of the proposed EU referendum question.

[Mr Gary Streeter (South West Devon)]

The Electoral Commission has begun its assessment of the referendum question proposed in the European Union Referendum Bill and will publish its assessment before Parliament returns from recess in September. The Commission has previously reported on the neutrality of the proposed question as part of the assessment of the question contained in a private Member’s Bill in 2013. That report found that a number of voters perceived a bias if the phrase, “Remain a member of the European Union” is used in isolation. The Commission therefore recommended an alternative question, which it found to be more neutral but which did not use yes and no as response options.

[Mr Turner]

The Electoral Commission has given its advice on the wording of the question in the referendum, and the Government have accepted its advice. Will my hon. Friend confirm that a similar approach will be taken to changes to the purdah rules?

[Mr Streeter]

It is certainly the case that the Electoral Commission has given advice on the purdah rules, which I will discuss when we reach question 5. Happily, I am not responsible for the Government accepting that advice.

[Philip Davies]

The Electoral Commission has said that the most neutral question for the EU referendum would be: should the UK leave the EU, or should it remain within the EU? Does my hon. Friend not believe that the Government should accept the independent advice of the Electoral Commission as to what is the most neutral question and put that in the referendum Bill?

[Mr Streeter]

My hon. Friend slightly anticipates the situation. The Electoral Commission is currently assessing and consulting on two questions: the question in the Bill and the question, “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union, or leave the European Union.” It will provide its findings and recommendations to the House in September.

[Derek Thomas (St Ives) (Con)]

3. If the Electoral Commission will commission a lay-person’s guide to the costs and benefits of UK membership of the EU before the EU referendum.

[Mr Streeter]

The Electoral Commission is currently considering what public information it will provide to voters on how to register and cast their vote at an EU referendum. However, given that it is also responsible for designating lead campaigners as well as registering and regulating other campaigners, the Commission does not believe that it would be appropriate for it also to produce a guide providing information about the costs and benefits of EU membership first hand as campaigners would want to make such a case themselves.

[Derek Thomas]

Does my hon. Friend agree that the British public have a right to a completely objective guide to our membership in order to take an informed decision in the in/out EU referendum?

[Mr Streeter]

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend, and that is what many of our constituents want. The issue is: who is best placed to provide that impartial guide? Given the complexity of the question—there are so many unknowns—and the importance of ensuring that the Electoral Commission does not in any way undermine its neutrality and independence, it may not be the right organisation to carry out that task.

[Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)]

If they are not the people to do it, I am quite happy to take on that task. It would be pointless having such a document because it will have pages and pages and pages of costs; I doubt that we would find a page on the benefits.

[Mr Streeter]

I will certainly put that offer back to the Electoral Commission. I am sure that it will be as enthusiastic as I am.

The right hon. Member for Meriden, representing the Church Commissioners, was asked—

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr David Burrowes (Enfield, Southgate) (Con)]

5. What assessment the Electoral Commission has made of the proposals in the European Union Referendum Bill relating to disapplication of purdah.

[Mr Gary Streeter (South West Devon)]

The Electoral Commission has set out in its briefings on the European Union Referendum Bill why it does not agree with the disapplication of section 125 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, as proposed in the legislation being considered by this House. The commission’s briefing papers on the legislation are circulated to hon. Members and published on its website.

[Mr Burrowes]

Does my hon. Friend expect the Government formally to respond to the helpfully clear advice that

“there is a risk that the use of significant amounts of public money for promotional activity could give an unfair advantage to one side of the argument”?

If so, can it be published?

[Mr Streeter]

I am not aware of any legal duty for the Government to respond to any recommendations made by the Electoral Commission, but I was pleased to hear earlier this week that the Government appear to be moving in the direction of the advice given by the commission. I am sure that my hon. Friend, who is a tenacious warrior on this issue, will welcome that.

[John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)]

As the hon. Gentleman just said, the Electoral Commission clearly disagreed with the Government’s position. Why does he think that the Government disagreed, other than in a wish to rig the referendum?

[Mr Streeter]

Happily, that is not a matter for me. I am sure that will be a question the hon. Gentleman will ask Ministers on the Front Bench, if he has not already done so.

The right hon. Member for Meriden, representing the Church Commissioners, was asked—

--- Later in debate ---

[Caroline Nokes (Romsey and Southampton North) (Con)]

9. What steps the Electoral Commission is taking to make guidance clearer on the use of commonly used names on ballot papers.

[Mr Gary Streeter (South West Devon)]

The commission first clarified its guidance on the law on commonly used names in 2011, then restated that guidance in March 2015 when it became clear that there was some confusion surrounding the rules. The Electoral Commission keeps its guidance under regular review.

[Caroline Nokes]

Advice from the Electoral Commission at the recent local elections suggested that middle names were not acceptable as commonly used names, leaving the wonderful councillor John Nigel Steward Anderdon on the ballot paper simply as “Nige”. What assurances can my hon. Friend give me that guidance will be clearer in the future?

[Mr Streeter]

The law that we in this House passed in 2006 states that a candidate may state a commonly used forename if it is different from any other forename that he or she has; therefore the use of a second or third Christian name—for example, Nigel or Boris—does not qualify under the 2006 legislation. The Electoral Commission is reviewing the matter, and if people have representations they would like to make, the commission would be grateful to receive them.