To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they will ensure that all postal ballots can be issued and returned in the 11 days between nominations of candidates and the elections on 6 May.

My Lords, the Government work with administrators, the Royal Mail and the Electoral Commission to ensure that postal voting is as effective as possible. The commission issues guidance to electoral administrators to ensure that they have the necessary processes in place. Royal Mail takes specific measures to support postal voting. Electors also have a part to play in ensuring that they return their postal votes in good time.

My Lords, is not the Minister immensely saddened that because of the Government’s reluctance to extend the timetable, thousands of our troops in Afghanistan may well miss out on voting in an election this year? What reason has the Minister for rejecting the advice and guidance not only of the Electoral Commission but of every election authority in the United Kingdom?

My Lords, there are two issues there. The registration deadline is key. For all elections the deadline for registration and for new or changed postal vote applications is 11 working days before polling day. Returning officers send out ballot papers only once this deadline has passed because, until the deadline, electors may change their address or cancel their postal vote, and we would not wish to see large numbers of duplicate ballot papers being distributed. On Afghanistan, the noble Lord will know—as will the House; it has been referred to before—that we are looking to put a scheme into place that will work for troops on active service in Afghanistan. We have been looking at the current postal vote system and we believe that it is possible, subject to operational priorities, to set up a scheme that would deliver ballot papers to and from Afghanistan in time for them to be counted.

The Electoral Commission has made a number of recommendations since the last general election. Can the Minister confirm that those recommendations have now been fully implemented; and if not, will he place in the Library a list of the recommendations from the Electoral Commission that the Government have rejected?

I am not in a position to say which recommendations are now in force, although I am sure that the vast majority are, and which are not, but I shall certainly put such a document in the Library.

My Lords, can the Minister confirm that there are distinct advantages, in terms of the timetable to which he referred, in holding the local and general elections on the same day? Does the higher proportion of postal votes make it more convenient and more efficacious to hold the count overnight on polling day?

My Lords, as for whether it is good idea to hold the general election on the same day as the local elections, there are a thousand opinions—and I am not about to express one. As for counting on the night of a general election, the independence of returning officers is very important. However, there seems to be a consensus across the political spectrum that the overnight count, which is a traditional part of our democracy, should if at all possible be retained—it cannot be retained everywhere; we know that—not least because of the drama of a general election, and such a night is an important way of actually engaging people in politics.

My Lords, can the Minister assure the House that the widespread cheating and malpractice that went on a few years ago, particularly in Birmingham, will not occur again?

The noble Baroness may know that as a result of the European elections and the local elections last year, the Electoral Commission has said that comparatively few cases of the kind of cheating or fraud to which she refers have been reported. We think that the position is much better than it was a few years ago. However, I would deny that fraud has ever been widespread following the enlargement of postal voting, and the position is certainly better than it was.

My Lords, can my noble friend confirm that far more ballot papers—that is, postal ballot papers and ballots cast in the normal way in the polling booth—are spoilt when elections are held under various methods of proportional representation? Can he confirm that the statistics show that conclusively? Does he agree with me that that is one further strong argument for retaining first past the post?

I believe that the system we should be looking to is the alternative vote system, which is what the Government are putting forward and which for some reason the Opposition are against.

My Lords, can the noble Lord assist us further on the date of the election? He has answered a question from the Liberal Democrat Front Bench spokesman, who was suggesting that it might be in June to coincide with the local elections. The question relates to 6 May. Can he assist us as to which he thinks is most likely?

I think that I can help the noble Lord and the House on the date of the general election: it will be before 3 June this year.

My Lords, can the Minister tell us how far the Government have got in the process of deciding whether prisoners can vote and, therefore, in complying with European legislation?

As I think the House knows, our view is that the right to vote goes to the essence of the offender’s relationship with a democratic society, and the removal of the right to vote in the case of some convicted prisoners can be a proportionate and proper response following conviction and imprisonment. However, we take our obligations under the ECHR seriously. We have to implement the judgment of the European court, but it has to be done in a way that takes into account our traditions and the political context of this country. That has always been understood, as I understand it. We have consulted, as the noble Baroness knows, and we are analysing the responses to that second consultation. We will consider the next steps towards implementing the judgment in legislation —as it would have to be—in due course.

My Lords, with respect, the Minister omitted to answer one part of my noble friend’s question. Why did the Government reject the recommendation of the Electoral Commission for a 25-day period?

There are issues of wider constitutional principles and the traditions and conventions of our system that allow the Prime Minister the flexibility to call and hold an election within a short timescale if that were necessary. However, even if we were to move to 25 days for all elections, it would not affect the fact that registration should be allowed for as long as possible. It would still have to be possible to do so no earlier than 11 working days before an election. We want people to be able to register right up to the last possible minute. Registration also goes with nominations. We want people to be able to nominate themselves or be nominated as close to the election as possible.