Select committee: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Conclusion 13

Fifth Report - The Elections Bill Published 13 Dec 2021 Paragraph 48

Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee The Elections Bill All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

Conclusion (the committee's words)

Many of the proposed changes in electoral law are not being made on the face of the Bill, but will be determined by secondary legislation. The melange of delegated powers provided for in this Bill serves to highlight, and potentially adds to, the complexity of an already disparate body of electoral law. We are disappointed that more of the detail regarding how the measures to be introduced via this Bill are to be implemented is being left to secondary legislation rather than being included on its face.

From: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Fifth Report - The Elections Bill (HC 597), paragraph 48, 13 December 2021

Government response

The government responded to the whole report on 10 February 2022 (deadline 13 February 2022).

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The government accepts some of the Committee's recommendations in part, for example agreeing "in principle" that electoral law would benefit from consolidation, but disagrees with others, including removing the Electoral Commission clauses, and does not accept that there was a lack of pre-legislative consultation and scrutiny.

On consolidating electoral law, the government "agrees in principle" that it would benefit, but calls it "a long-term project" and "not something to rush", with its immediate priority being its manifesto pledges.
On post-legislative scrutiny, it says an amendment is not necessary as scrutiny after Royal Assent is "standard practice", and a statutory requirement "risks not allowing for the necessary flexibility".
On the Electoral Commission, the government says it "disagrees" with the recommendation to remove the relevant clauses, and does not consider the effect of the duty to "have regard" to the Statement needs clarifying on the face of the Bill.
On voter ID, it does not pause the policy, citing its Equality Impact Assessment and a 2021 survey finding 98% held accepted photographic identification, and says it will "carry out thorough research" on implementation.

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error