Draft Combined Authorities (Mayoral Elections) Order 2017 Draft Combined Authorities (Mayors) (Filling of Vacancies) Order 2017

Jim McMahon Excerpts

Tuesday 10th January 2017 General Committees

[Jim McMahon (Oldham West and Royton) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Paisley. I congratulate the Minister on talking at length about what is a straightforward matter.

A few points of clarity would be helpful. Everybody present recognises the importance of these elections, not just because we value voter turnout, but because, in order to demonstrate the authority of Mayors, it is important to demonstrate that there has been a decent turnout and that people support them and acknowledge the importance of their role.

There are 18 designated areas in the UK where postal vote fraud and electoral fraud may be being carried out. Those areas are under special arrangements, so when people vote they have to provide both photo identification and a second form of ID, such as a utility bill, mortgage statement or council tax bill. Some of those areas will take part in the forthcoming mayoral elections, which in some cases means that a single voting officer will have to oversee different voting arrangements. Voters in the Oldham district of Greater Manchester will have to produce two forms of ID, but those a step over the road in the Manchester district will not. I would be grateful if the Minister could explain how he envisages a returning officer administering what are, in effect, two electoral processes in the same area.

On the points raised during the consultation, I fully support the principles that have been taken on board. I struggled to understand why the Greater Manchester combined authority asked to be able to decide for itself who should get the notice of election and voting cards. That should be determined by a national framework, and we are pleased that the Government have not gone with that recommendation. The spending limits make complete sense—they are in line with the calculations used locally—and the number of signatures required for a candidate to stand is also reasonable for the areas in question.

I am therefore happy to support the draft orders. I would be grateful for a response on the point about ID and how the returning officer will administer that process.