Schedule 1
Political Parties and Elections Bill
6:00 pm
Jonathan Djanogly (Shadow Minister, Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Huntingdon, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 102, in schedule 1, page 13, line 15, leave out sub-sub-paragraph (1)(d).
The part of the schedule to which the amendment refers deals with powers
“in relation to registered parties and others”,
and it is the “others” bit about which we have most concern. The amendment proposes the deletion of the term “regulated donee” from the list of people or groups to whom the commission’s new investigative powers will apply. This part of the schedule is effectively lifted from the PPERA, but with the important change of inserting that category.
The meaning of “regulated donee” is defined in paragraph 1(7) of schedule 7 to that Act as
“a member of a registered party...a members association; or...the holder of a relevant elective office, whether or not he is a member of a registered party.”
The amendment comes on the back of our concerns about the extension of the powers to individuals. Given that a person can fall under that provision and not be a member of a registered party, I fear that unless we are careful the effect will be to push people further away from the political process. The hon. Member for Cambridge said earlier that we have to examine politicians, but he will appreciate that what we are discussing here goes much further than politicians and deals with donors.
By broadening the scope of which people the powers of investigation cover, we are in danger of casting the net too wide. People may become fearful, or at least think twice about volunteering their time and energy to assist political parties, if the end result might be that they are investigated by the commission for an action that they have no direct involvement in. My understanding is that it was the Ministry of Justice, rather than the commission, that requested these extensions to the powers. Will the Minister please explain why, and why he believes that they will be required in practice?
In an era of political disfranchisement and unwillingness to get involved in the political process, the last thing that we wish to do is discourage donors. We must be careful to ensure that we do not introduce legislation so broad that it tars everyone with the same brush. We do not need another reason for members of the public to turn their backs on political parties.
The provision is also a disproportionately powerful tool to hand to the commission. How does the Minister see the balance between its enforcement role and the need to safeguard the public from arbitrary state interference working in the paragraph that I mentioned? Can he give hon. Members an idea of the number of people in the UK who would be considered regulated donees and therefore fall within its scope?
What evidence has the commission, or any other body, presented to the Government to support the need for such a broad definition of those who can be investigated? The impact of the change will clearly be to alter the limited scope of the powers and apply them to a hugely larger catchment group. Finally, what example can the Minister give of the powers having been required in practice?