Chamber and committees

Not tomorrow, but imminently.

As I have said—and I state again on the public record—I want that bill to be seen as the Parliament’s bill. It is a Scottish Government bill, but we are talking about the very heart and soul of our democracy and it has to be seen to be the Parliament’s bill.

I will want to speak to you, convener, and probably to Mr Kerr in his role in that regard in the Conservative Party, and to other political parties, about what I am planning on bringing forward, when we get to that stage, as it is important that you buy into the bill at an early stage. In addition, if I suggest something, you can point out if you think that I may have gone down a rabbit hole on one or two items. I want to get to the point at which, when we discuss the bill as introduced, it will literally be about the detail and, when we get to stage 2, it will be about the detail of how we make the bill better, should that be required.

That is important for all of us to make things work. We are the face of everything that is happening, but all the hard work happens behind us. The officials and the clerks ensure that everything works.

On your first point, I am happy to come back to you with details and timescales when we get to that stage. With regard to the detail, Iain Hockenhull is probably better placed to give you more information on that.

Ironically, I had a meeting with the Electoral Commission yesterday about that. Obviously, you can see our figures compared with those of the other devolved nations. Our accuracy was 81 per cent.

I discuss with officials the fact that we cannot keep doing the same thing over and over again as we go forward, because it is clear that we are not getting the accuracy that we need. It is probably a case of looking at other ways and other ideas, looking at best practice and what is happening in other nations across the world, and seeing whether there is another way in which we can do things.

Many people will say that it is a case of educating the voters and letting them know, but I do not think that it is as simple as that. I think that there is something that we really need to look at. However, I do not have one idea that I think will to make a difference overnight at this stage. I have asked officials to come up with ideas and to look at different ways of bringing things forward. I do not have any details on that at the moment but, as always, I am quite happy to keep the committee updated on that.

I am extremely interested in what is happening with the Welsh Government’s plans in that regard. When I talk to my equivalent down in Wales, I will question them on how they are doing and how things are going. As I keep saying, there is no point in us just doing the same stuff as we have been doing, because it ain’t working.

If the Electoral Commission and I had come to a conclusion on that at the end of yesterday’s meeting, we would have already enacted something to sort it. As we have already said in this conversation, there are a lot more variables in the scenario to consider. We need to get to the stage of making sure that we know that the data is correct. I have already spoken, as have colleagues here today, about anecdotal reasons why people will not register and about the inaccuracies in the data. All that I can do is assure you that my officials and I are working towards getting that information further forward.

I am happy to work with the Electoral Commission, because all of us—politicians and the Electoral Commission—have responsibility for the issue. I am quite happy to work with the commission to find a way to get the detail and data that we need, so that we can break that down further and I can sit here in front of you and say, “This is the issue, and here is my solution.”

Ironically, for the past half hour, we have been discussing barriers to people being able to vote, and now we are talking about another barrier. I am still not convinced that the way forward is to use voter ID. Anecdotally, as an activist in the election, I was aware of a level of confusion among many voters as to how they were going to exercise their right to vote. However, I will bring in Iain Hockenhull to give you the details from the officials’ point of view.

If I may be brutally honest, I have had conversations with special advisers in particular because the fact that special advisers are part of the problem with making progress has been noted in numerous reports. However, to be fair to them—you do not often hear people say that with regard to special advisers—there was a point when a lot of FOIs were coming in and there was no leadership in Government dealing with it. A request would float about the organisation for a while until it appeared on someone’s desk with 24 hours to go. That has changed, because we have case handlers who are constantly following up matters. It is as simple as saying, “That is your FOI for your directorate; you need to get that done.” We have managed to keep moving on that as well.

Special advisers probably do not get anywhere near as many FOIs as they did previously, because of some of the things that have been brought up in the report and because they are dealt with at Government level within the directorates and portfolios themselves. Things have moved on and we have taken on board many bits of advice. It comes back to me again. My conversations with the commissioner are to discuss when we come out of special measures and move forward, because we have created a system that is getting better as time goes on. As I mentioned, the commissioner said at a recent meeting that he thought that the Government was an example of an organisation that had struggled with FOIs but had turned that around.

Well, I do not like to say that it is all about me—