Clause 10
Political Parties and Elections Bill
3:15 pm
Martin Linton (Battersea, Labour)
We come now to triggering, which for many of us is the most important issue in the Bill. I am conscious that we have very little time left so I shall not take an unfair share of it. It is important to set out the issues. I have been dedicated for a long time to the notion that if the Bill achieves nothing else, it should close the loophole unintentionally created in the 2000 Act—on which Committee I also served—which leaves completely unrestricted spending by candidates up until the date of dissolution.
Triggering—in other words, control of candidates’ spending—was in force for 17 years before that, since the 1983 Act and, as far as I know, since the Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act 1883. For most of our history we have had control of candidates’ spending. It was dropped only by mistake in the 2000 Act. I have looked up the historic debate in the House of Lords where that occurred. Amendment No. 253G was the first time in the discussion of that Bill that it was proposed to introduce the words
“a) on the date of—
(i) the dissolution of Parliament,”—[Official Report, House of Lords, 24 October 2000; Vol. 618, c. 227.]
That was just a few weeks before the Bill received Royal Assent, long after it had left the House of Commons and long after the Committee stage. The phrase had never been mentioned and there had been no intention or discussion to remove the trigger during the course of that Bill. Then on 24 October that amendment appeared in the House of Lords. It was opposed by the Conservative Front Bencher Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish, who sought to delete the words
“on the date of dissolution”.
Sadly, the deletion was opposed by the Government Front Bencher at that time, Lord Bach, who said:
“If he withdraws his amendments, I promise to look at the point that he has raised.”—[Official Report, House of Lords, 24 October 2000; Vol. 618, c. 229.]
That is a phrase we often hear in Committee and on Report. I have implicit trust in the Minister that when he has said to me that he promises to look at the points that I raised on a number of amendments, he will be as good as his word.