Source · Select Committees · Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Recommendation 5

5 Paragraph: 29

The Committee notes and regrets that the Bill was not afforded pre-legislative scrutiny.

Conclusion
The Committee notes and regrets that the Bill was not afforded pre-legislative scrutiny.
Paragraph Reference: 29
Government Response Acknowledged
HM Government Acknowledged
The Government does not accept the assertion that there was a ‘lack of pre-legislative consultation and scrutiny’ in the development of the Elections Bill, which is a product of a wide range of views and engagement with the electoral sector, civil society organisations, parliamentarians and the Parliamentary Parties Panel. Many elements have stemmed directly from reports and reviews conducted by Parliamentarians, such as the 2016 report on electoral fraud by Sir, now Lord, Eric Pickles. Four sets of measures in this legislation - namely, those on accessibility, overseas electors, intimidation and digital imprints - have also been directly subject of Government consultation. In addition to this, ahead of bringing forward the legislative proposals for voter identification, we undertook a range of voter identification pilots in 2018 and 2019 which were independently reviewed by the Electoral Commission. Furthermore, we have proactively sought the input and expert eye of those with detailed knowledge of the operation of elections and those who would be impacted by the measures in the Bill. Since the announcement of the Bill, it has received scrutiny from the Joint Committee on Human Rights, the provisions have been debated in two Westminster Hall debates and it has undergone Committee stage in the House of Commons, including four evidence sessions. As the former Minister of the Constitution and Devolution, Chloe Smith MP highlighted in oral evidence1 to the Committee, it is standard practice for the Government to conduct post-legislative scrutiny of Acts following Royal Assent, so it would not be necessary for the Bill to be amended to include a specific provision to this effect. Moreover, in order for post-legislative scrutiny to be able to effectively review the impact of the legislation, it will be important to allow time for elections to take place. The Bill already makes provision for an evaluation of the impact of the implementation of voter identification to be completed following the first three sets of elections where the requirements apply. The Electoral Commission also already has a statutory duty under PPERA to undertake reports on the administration of each Parliamentary elections, and has routinely published reports following Local Elections. A specific statutory requirement risks not allowing for the necessary flexibility to report following elections as they happen. With regards to secondary legislation, a significant amount of the policy intent and function is set out on the face of the Bill, and has been scrutinised in detail in the House of Commons; the House of Lords will shortly be undertaking its own detailed scrutiny of the Bill in the same way. The Government has also published an updated Delegated Powers Memorandum2 setting out the provisions of the Bill as amended in the House of Commons that confer or amend powers to make delegated legislation, explaining in each case why the power has been taken and the nature of, and the reason for, the procedure selected.