David Heath (Shadow Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs & Shadow Leader of the House, Law Officers (Constitutional Affairs); Somerton & Frome, Liberal Democrat)

May I ask the Minister what is meant by subsection (5)? It seems odd that the power to make a variation that terminates part of a scheme put in place by statutory instrument following consultation should not itself be subject to consultation. I would expect the Secretary of State to take the advice of the Electoral Commission and other bodies before making a variation that deletes part of the scheme just as for a variation that increases the scope of the scheme. I am at a loss to understand why subsection (5) is in the clause.

Eleanor Laing (Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, Scotland; Epping Forest, Conservative)

Clause 6(4) rightly states:

''An order establishing or varying a CORE scheme must not be made unless the Secretary of State first consults—

(a) the Electoral Commission;

(b) the Information Commissioner;

(c) the ERO who acts for each area proposed to be specified in the scheme;

(d) the ERO who acts for an area the specification of which the Secretary of State proposes to remove from the scheme.''

That is all perfectly reasonable, and we have no objection to it, but why should not there be consultation with the political parties? They know how the register works and are aware of what is and is not working correctly in an area.

Edward O'Hara (Knowsley South, Labour)

Order. I think that the hon. Lady is referring to something that we shall deal with later.

Harriet Harman (Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs; Camberwell & Peckham, Labour)

In answer to the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome, the clause provides for one exception to the requirement to consult before making an order, where the effect of the order is to terminate part of a scheme only. The thinking behind that exception is that a particular responsibility of a CORE keeper under a scheme may not be working as envisaged, and that it may be necessary to terminate that aspect of the CORE keeper's responsibilities as quickly as possible to limit the negative impact.

In response to the hon. Member for Epping Forest, the proposed consultees in paragraphs (a) to (d) are statutory creatures; political parties are not in quite the same category. Of course, it goes without saying that political parties will be consulted all the way along, but it is just the statutory creatures that are laid out by way of consultation.

Edward O'Hara (Knowsley South, Labour)

Order. I stand corrected regarding my previous advice to the hon. Lady. I am getting my amendments out of order; she referred to an amendment that has already been debated.

Eleanor Laing (Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, Scotland; Epping Forest, Conservative)

I beg your pardon, Mr. O'Hara. I appreciate that amendment No. 42 touched on this issue, but we did not discuss it at that point. The Minister has given me a good explanation.

Edward O'Hara (Knowsley South, Labour)

Yes; of course, it is not in order to reopen the debate.

Eleanor Laing (Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, Scotland; Epping Forest, Conservative)

I beg your pardon.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 7 and 8 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Further consideration adjourned.—[Kevin Brennan.]

Adjourned accordingly at half-past Twelve o'clock till this day at Four o'clock.