Clause 44 - Returning officers: correction of
Electoral Administration Bill
2:15 pm

Photo of David Cairns

David Cairns (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Scotland Office; Inverclyde, Labour)

Clause 44 allows returning officers to correct errors or omissions that arise during the preparation for and conduct of a UK parliamentary election or local elections in England and Wales. It will also allow returning officers to direct that erroneous acts and omissions made by other persons involved in administering elections be corrected. That includes presiding officers, electoral registration officers and their staff, and those supplying goods and services to the administrators. For example, electoral documents such as ballot papers printed with incorrect details could be corrected.

The clause also provides that a returning officer will not be found guilty of an offence for an act or omission that is in breach of his official duty if he can demonstrate that he has corrected that error in full by taking steps under subsection (1), as the hon. Gentleman said.

I may have nodded a bit precipitously earlier, because I thought that the hon. Gentleman was heading in one direction with his question, but then he went off in another. We have been assured by the parliamentary draftsmen, however, that the clause is phrased in the way that it should be.

When I was looking into this issue in preparation for the Committee, I was amazed by the number of things that are not allowed to be corrected, including the declaration. Should the returning officer simply read the numbers out wrongly when declaring a result, that declaration will be the result. Clearly, that is absurd, and the clause would allow such things to be put right.

The clause is intended to give returning officers a degree of flexibility. Mistakes happen, and although serious ones would obviously have to be dealt with elsewhere, minor inadvertent mistakes by the returning officer or those under his charge could be corrected. Currently, as the hon. Gentleman rightly said, they are not, and that is what I was nodding at.

I do not entirely share the hon. Gentleman's fears about the way in which the clause is phrased, but we share the same intent. The clause is clearly a common-sense provision. If people can correct minor mistakes and demonstrate that they have done so, they should not be prosecuted. I hope that that gives the hon. Gentleman some satisfaction.

Annotations

No annotations

Sign in or join to post a public annotation.