Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Nick Clegg and Jim Cunningham

Tuesday 26th March 2013 Commons Chamber

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

As I hope my hon. Friend will know, the principal intention of the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013, which we are seeking to implement as quickly as we can, is precisely to deal with the high levels of fraud in certain parts of the country, which most people of all parties felt was unacceptable.

[Mr Jim Cunningham (Coventry South) (Lab)]

T3. What consideration has the Deputy Prime Minister given to lowering the voting age to 16?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

That is not something that the coalition is going to deliver. I am personally persuaded of the case for lowering the voting age, but it was not included in the coalition agreement, so it is not something that the coalition Government will deliver during this Parliament.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Nick Clegg and Jim Cunningham

Tuesday 22nd June 2010 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jim Cunningham (Coventry South) (Lab)]

1. When he expects to publish the timetable for a referendum on the alternative vote system for general elections.

[The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Nick Clegg)]

The Government have made clear their intention to introduce legislation providing for a national referendum on the alternative vote for future elections to the House of Commons. The appropriate timetable for that legislation and the subsequent referendum is currently being considered within Government. Further details will be announced to the House in due course.

[Mr Cunningham]

Given that answer, why has the Deputy Prime Minister prioritised boundary changes, as opposed to a date for a referendum on the electoral system? Can he answer that question, or has the Prime Minister leaned on him?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

The coalition agreement is clear. We want to proceed with the preparations for a referendum, giving people the choice to choose a new electoral system—the alternative vote system—and, in parallel, to proceed with a review of boundaries. Reviewing boundaries in this country is not a new thing. If the hon. Gentleman would care to look back at the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986, which establishes the provisions for reviews of boundaries, he will see that the legislation imposes a requirement on us to keep the size of the House of Commons lower than it currently is, and to have greater equality between the sizes of constituencies. I do not think that anybody will quibble with the principle that people’s votes should count equally, wherever they so happen to live.