Clause 5 - CORE schemes: supplemental
Electoral Administration Bill
12:00 pm
Eleanor Laing (Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, Scotland; Epping Forest, Conservative)
We are making progress, and I am grateful to the Minister for answering so many intricate and difficult questions this morning. In doing so, she gives us more confidence in our understanding of how the proposed schemes will work. As I said, it is important to reach some kind of consensus. The Bill is not like other political matters. If we do not have consensus about how our democracy works, and, as a result, we do not have confidence in the electoral system, that undermines the validity of elections. I do not suggest that we are at that stage now; most Members of the House have confidence in the electoral system, and we have debated it at length many times over the years. However, it is important that we investigate the matters in intricate detail.
I still believe that the system in Britain is one of the best in the world. I felt almost personally insulted when, as happened a few months ago, some of the ways in which our electoral system was administered were referred to very critically as akin to those of a banana republic. Such remarks are not good for democracy in Britain. That remark was made perfectly reasonably, and many of us agreed with it. We cannot have such occurrences, because confidence in the workings of our democracy is basic to the working of our society and country.
Clause 5(1) provides that a CORE scheme
''may make provision as to circumstances in which a payment is to be made—
(a) by the CORE keeper to an ERO whose area is specified in the scheme;
(b) by such an ERO to the CORE keeper.''
I wonder why. I should like to know specifically what the Minister of State envisages—[Interruption.] This is the crux of the question. I entirely understand if the Minister of State is not paying absolute attention to every word of my preamble—