Clause 1 - CORE schemes: establishment
Electoral Administration Bill
10:30 am
Eleanor Laing (Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, Scotland; Epping Forest, Conservative)
Part 1 concerns the co-ordinated online record of electors—the CORE scheme. In principle it is a good idea, but we have concerns about it. Amendment No. 35 would alter clause 1 so that it would read, ''The Secretary of State may, pursuant to consultation with all affected political parties, by order make provision for the establishment of one or more schemes (CORE schemes) in connection with the keeping and use of specified electoral registration information by a person designated by a scheme (the CORE keeper).''
The consultation process is important; those who administer the schemes will learn from them as time goes on. Indeed, it is hard to imagine why there should not be consultation on such a matter. The whole point of the Bill is to achieve consensus on how we deal with electoral administration. As the Minister has said previously, as the matter affects all relevant political parties, and we should therefore achieve some sort of consensus, a consultation process would be a good first step. Without consultation, how can it be known whether there is consensus?
Amendment No. 36 would strengthen the clause. Clause 1(3) refers to a scheme that ''may'' require an electoral registration officer to provide the CORE keeper with the information and to update the information. It is hard to understand why the Bill should leave that as an optional extra. If we consider that the electoral registration officer should do certain things, why should the Bill say that the scheme ''may'' require it? Surely the scheme must require it. Whether it is required should not be left open to discussion. That is why we consider that the word ''must'' should replace the word ''may''.
Likewise, amendment No. 37 refers to subsection (6). We suggest that an additional paragraph (c) be inserted to
''require the CORE keeper to maintain the information securely to protect the integrity of the information from non-specified third parties.''
We do not mean to challenge what the Government propose; the amendment is intended to enhance the Bill. It is surely necessary that the information garnered be maintained securely—the electoral register contains sensitive information—and the integrity of the information should be protected from non-specified third parties.
Amendment No. 42 refers to—