Debates between Lord Bellingham and Chris Skidmore during the 2015-2017 Parliament

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Bellingham and Chris Skidmore
Wednesday 2nd November 2016

(7 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Skidmore Portrait Chris Skidmore
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Lady is right, but there is a problem with young people’s registration: we allow 16-year-olds to register to vote, but only 37% of them choose to do so. As I said earlier, we need to take account of the issues that matter to young people. Such issues will be debated by the Youth Parliament next Friday, but none of those to which the hon. Lady refers are on the agenda.

Lord Bellingham Portrait Sir Henry Bellingham (North West Norfolk) (Con)
- Hansard - -

2. How he plans to give UK citizens living overseas the right to vote for life.

Glyn Davies Portrait Glyn Davies (Montgomeryshire) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

10. What progress he has made on giving UK citizens living overseas the right to vote for life.

Chris Skidmore Portrait The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Chris Skidmore)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On 7 October the Government published a policy statement setting out our detailed proposals for votes for life, and explaining how we plan to meet our manifesto commitment to scrap the 15-year time limit for overseas voting. We intend the system to be in place before the next scheduled UK parliamentary general election.

Lord Bellingham Portrait Sir Henry Bellingham
- Hansard - -

I thank the Minister for that encouraging reply, but may I return to the subject of cutting the cost of politics? Can he tell us when the Government will be able to equalise the size of constituencies?

Chris Skidmore Portrait Chris Skidmore
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are determined that by the time of the 2020 general election, the historic principle of equal seats will be in place. If we do not introduce that reform, we will be fighting our seats on the basis of data that go back to the year 2000, meaning that they are 20 years out of date. That is completely unacceptable, which is why we must press ahead with boundary reform.