Representation of the People Bill (First sitting)

Sojan Joseph Excerpts

Committee stage
Wednesday 18th March 2026 Public Bill Committees

[Lisa Smart]

Q I should declare that I am a member of the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission. You have already answered one of my questions, which was about profit being a better measure than turnover for companies donating, so I will not ask you about that.

The Electoral Commission’s press release in response to the publication of the Bill said—I cannot remember the exact phrasing—that the Bill was welcome but that it did not go quite far enough, and that the commission would like to see more measures to tackle issues with where we are in our democracy. Trust in politics is at a very low level, and trust in our democracy is an important element in our democracy remaining legitimate and in our having the trust and faith of the electorate. What more would you like to see the Bill do to rebuild trust in politics?

Vijay Rangarajan: There are a couple of areas where we would like to see further work. I have already mentioned company donations—that is crucial. To be clear, our polling shows that while trust in politics in general is quite low, trust in the electoral system is very high, as two of your previous witnesses said. That is important.

We would like the “know your donor” provisions to be strengthened. At the moment, to pass them, a political party accepting a donation would need to produce a risk assessment, but it would be good if that had to be public, sent to us or used in such a way that others could judge whether there was a reasonable risk of a party accepting impermissible donations. We know that that is one of the areas the public have least faith in: somewhere between 14% and 17% of the public think the political finance system works for them.

The second area is automatic registration, where it is less about the change in the Bill and more about implementing it before the next general election. Most countries have systems like this, and they work well. We know the data sources quite well. We recently evaluated four pilots in Welsh local authorities, and showed that they were very successful at boosting not only the completeness of the register but, crucially, the accuracy. There is not a tension between completeness and accuracy when you are using good data sources. We can now do that.

Another area to flag is overseas voters, which I think your previous witnesses mentioned. In many cases around the world, we think they have a hard deal in actually being able to vote. We would like to see further work to help them.

Finally, if the Committee does not mind, I will just ride my hobby horse. This will be the 27th Representation of the People Act, and some consolidation and simplification of electoral law is necessary, not least for electoral administrators, parties and candidates. We would very much like to see a broad-ranging, cross-party and Government commitment to do some consolidation over the next few years.

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

Q I want to ask a question about foreign donations. The Bill seeks to ensure that any company making political donations must be able to demonstrate that it has a genuine connection to the UK. Do you believe that that will be sufficient to prevent foreign-linked entities from donating to political parties?

Vijay Rangarajan: We think that it is a very useful change but that it does not go far enough. We see a range of threats—I must admit that this is drawn from our experience of looking at other elections in other countries and working with partner electoral commissions —and that includes online. In the financial space, there is a distinct attempt by people to channel money into other people’s politics. It would be perfectly possible, even with the provisions you mentioned, for people in other countries, or impermissible donors in general, to channel money through a company, even if it had that linkage. That is why some kind of a cap on how much a company can donate, based on profit, coupled with the other tests the Government have in the Bill—for example, on persons of significant control—would be really helpful.

That will not completely eliminate the risk, and we look forward to what Philip Rycroft says about any other measures that may be needed, but we think it will help not only to reassure parties that they are at lower risk of accepting impermissible donations, which is a criminal act, but to reassure voters that the system is being kept under close review.

[Lewis Cocking (Broxbourne) (Con)]

Q I would like to talk about the 8 million people you reckon are not registered. Some of those people might choose not to register to vote, and the Government’s intention in the Bill is to bring in automatic voter registration. Do you see any issues with that if they are not all automatically registered for the same general election? For example, if four million are automatically registered before the next general election, and four million are not, you could argue that there are two different sets of electors, with one being easier to register and one being harder. Can you comment on that?

Vijay Rangarajan: You are absolutely right. One of the risks we have with automatic voter registration across the UK is a significant divergence of systems. The Welsh Government have already carried out successful pilots and done a lot of work on this. As I understand it, they intend to proceed with automatic voter registration in Wales relatively soon—over the next year or so. The Scottish Government are also beginning to think about it.

Obviously, the provisions are here in the Bill, but there is quite a long timescale for them. It is possible that we will end up with several different systems of automatic voter registration, and that they will act at different times. That would have real problems, and it does not feel to us like a good use of money. It would also be very complex indeed for an electoral registration officer to try to handle different registration systems in one area for different elections. Take, for example, a Welsh officer dealing with automatic voter registration for Welsh elections but not for UK-wide ones. We would welcome some rapid work to establish a UK-wide system of automatic voter registration soon.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Chair]

I will squeeze you in, Mr Joseph, if you are very quick.

[Sojan Joseph]

Q Thank you. My question is to Ms Jones. We had many positive outcomes from the automatic registration pilot in Wales. Can you briefly tell us whether you faced any challenges, especially around concerns about adding people’s details automatically without their consent? Have you had any experienceof that?

Karen Jones: Chair, is it possible to write to the Committee with a detailed response to that? There is an evaluation report that goes into some detail about the challenges that were faced in the four authorities. They took very different approaches, so I am afraid that there is not a simple answer that I will be able to cover in the time available.

Representation of the People Bill (Second sitting)

Sojan Joseph Excerpts

Committee stage
Wednesday 18th March 2026 Public Bill Committees

[The Chair]

Mr Joseph, you have one minute for your question and the answer.

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

Q I know we touched on the question of MPs not being able to help you or locate you because the digital system we use, CaseWorker, is linked to the voter register. Maybe that is why we cannot help, but do you think that there should be a separate register for those living overseas? Would that resolve such issues?

Colin Blackwell: Each constituency has a separate overseas register, and we political parties get this. We get all the overseas register data. I am not exactly sure what benefit a central register brings, other than maybe convenience, but I do think it is potentially a slippery slope for then saying, “Oh, well, let’s have overseas constituencies just for overseas Brits,” which we do not think is a good idea. We think it is counterintuitive and has the potential to severely reduce overseas electors’ representation, not enhance it.

At the last election, in our manifesto, the Conservative party saw the solution as appointing a Minister for Brits abroad—a representative in government battling for Brits abroad, and effectively, with civil service support, answering the questions that MPs get from their overseas electors. I do not necessarily see the benefit of unifying the existing separate overseas registers into a single one.

[The Chair]

You have had the last word of this panel, Mr Blackwell. On behalf of the Committee, I thank our witnesses in the Boothroyd Room and online for their evidence.

Examination of Witnesses

Azzurra Moores and Chris Morris gave evidence.

Representation of the People Bill (Fifth sitting)

Sojan Joseph Excerpts

Committee stage
Thursday 26th March 2026 Public Bill Committees

[Paul Holmes]

Of course I accept that, if they do not have a form of ID listed as acceptable in the advertisement, that is a factor. But they are also told that they can go and get a special form of identification to allow them to vote. That is specifically catered for under the Elections Act 2022, and should they not have one of the listed forms of identification, that alternative form of identification to enable them to vote is free of charge.

The barriers being put forward by Members—I do not count the hon. Member for Hazel Grove among them yet; I will wait until she speaks to her new clause—saying that people simply cannot vote because they do not have those forms of ID, is nonsense. There is an acceptable form of ID that is catered for under the Elections Act 2022.

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

While the majority of young people already possess a bank card, they may not have other forms of ID like a driving licence or a passport. Does the hon. Member think that allowing a bank card will encourage more 16 and 17-year olds to participate in the electoral process?

[Paul Holmes]

I do not think that simply changing legislation to enable a bank card already in existence to be used as ID will encourage younger people to vote. The fact that the Government are reducing the voting age to 16 will encourage more young people to vote, and when they are excited to go and cast their first vote, as I was at 18—I still think it should be 18, by the way, but we are past that point—then they will find a way of making sure that they can get a form of identification that is already catered for in this country under the Elections Act 2024.

In the 2024 general election, the Electoral Commission estimated that 99.92% of people who turned out were able to cast their vote successful. Only 0.08% of those who attempted to vote were unable to do so due to voter identification requirements—a figure that has been acknowledged by the current Government. At the same time, there has been a marked increase since 2019 in public confidence in the integrity of our elections, with more people believing that polls are free from fraud and abuse. Importantly, any eligible elector without recognised identification can obtain a free voter authority certificate, ensuring that no one is prevented from voting because of a lack of ID. There is no current barrier to anyone being able to vote.

Representation of the People Bill

Sojan Joseph Excerpts

Report stage & 3rd reading
Wednesday 2nd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

It is a real pleasure to see this Bill back on the Floor of the House. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon) for her work on the Bill—it was a pleasure to serve with her in Committee—and I congratulate the Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith, my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi), on her appointment.

As was acknowledged on Second Reading, there are significant concerns about the potential for cryptocurrency donations to undermine the integrity of our politics. These concerns were raised by many Government Members in Committee too, and we were reassured that amendments would be brought in at this stage. These concerns are not least because it can be difficult to determine the true source of the funds.

During the Bill’s earlier stages, the Government committed to incorporating the findings of Sir Philip Rycroft’s review and ensuring that the recommendations were reflected in the legislation. I welcome the fact that Ministers took the time to do that, leading to Government new clause 72. This new clause would prohibit UK-registered political parties from accepting donations made in cryptoassets. Any donation made wholly or partially in cryptoassets would automatically be treated as coming from an impermissible donor, and therefore could not be accepted. The Government are proposing that parties take reasonable steps to identify anyone attempting to make a cryptoasset donation and, where such donations are received, to return them or otherwise dispose of them in accordance with the existing rules governing prohibited donations.

New clause 72 also introduces a statutory definition of “cryptoasset” and gives the Secretary of State the power to update the definition through regulations. This is a sensible and proportionate measure. Since the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 was passed at the start of the century, the financial landscape has changed considerably, most notably through the growth of cryptocurrencies. This has created new challenges for regulators, law enforcement agencies and those responsible for maintaining public confidence in democratic institutions. After listening to many colleagues today, I think that some concerns remain unaddressed, so I hope that the Minister will address those that have been raised and close all the loopholes that have been mentioned.

Government new clause 116 would introduce an annual cap of £100,000 on political donations and certain regulated transactions from overseas contributors. The cap would apply to individuals registered as overseas electors and certain individuals who are on the UK electoral register but have spent time living outside the United Kingdom. It is, of course, welcome that British citizens living abroad for more than 15 years have since 2022 been entitled to vote in UK elections once again. However, as Philip Rycroft noted in his review, while British citizens living overseas can legitimately participate in UK democracy and make political donations, donations from overseas electors present additional risks that need to be managed.

We have heard numerous concerns in this debate, and I hope that Ministers will look again into those concerns and address the loopholes.

[Several hon. Members rose—]