Chamber and committees

Yes.

Currently, that is how we all put our names forward, and I am comfortable with the process. With all the checks and balances that local authorities do when people put their names forward for election, we should be in a safe place with that. However, as I said when I answered your second question, if people have issues with it, that might be something that we can look at. We would need to investigate that to see whether it is a problem.

I will just double check with my officials. [Interruption.] Yes, it will be.

I am sorry if I sound as though I am repeating myself, but it comes down to the limited number of individuals involved. Consider the general population and how many people put their names forward to local authorities, and then apply that to a part of the community where a limited number of people would proceed. An even tinier number of people would be affected should there be any discrepancies and there is a by-election because someone has put their name forward when they should not have.

I am not saying that that is impossible but, if I were a betting man, I would not be betting on the chances of that happening. I am not saying that it could not happen; it could in extreme cases, but the numbers are such that there would be very few people to whom that would apply. On the whole, compared to by-elections that currently take place in local authorities, I do not think that the number will change to a great degree.

To give you more detail and make you feel even better, I will bring in Iain Hockenhull.

Indeed—if we ended up in a place where I do not think that we are going to end up.

I am confident that it is still correct.

I do not want to labour this point, and I agree with you that many island communities have embraced people from other parts of the world but, again, we should look at the numbers. I have a colleague who says, “Always look at the numbers, George.” If we do that, we see that most people who come to start a new life in Scotland will be in our urban population, and probably in our main cities. I take your point on board, but I am still okay with everything as it is.

I will take the second question first. My officials will love me, because, every time that I appear before a committee, I add to the elections bill. I think that Iain Hockenhull has already said that the bill is getting a lot larger than it was. However, it is important that we look at all the options with regard to the consultation that we are putting forward. We need to make sure that, when we introduce our elections bill, in a number of years’ time, we have something robust to use in the future.

What was your first question again?

Ironically, I have had that conversation with officials as well. My question was why this has not been done before now. It simply appears to be yet another one of those quirks of local government elections, which we experienced in the previous session.

I will also say something so that I can get it on the record. Information on the proposed changes was shared with the Electoral Commission, the Electoral Management Board for Scotland, the Association of Electoral Administrators, the Scottish Assessors Association’s electoral registration committee, the Society of Local Authority Lawyers and Administrators in Scotland, the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, political parties that are represented in the Scottish Parliament and community groups that represent people with protected characteristics.

It is worth stressing that the change was requested by the convener of the Electoral Management Board. The board approached us and asked us to make the change. When we looked at the matter, as we are doing in our discussion at the moment, we thought that it made sense to make the change, so, on the Electoral Management Board’s say-so, we decided to progress with it.

Is that the normal way that I like to go about business? Probably not, but I do not believe that the change will make any difference to elections, candidates or administrators. The change also makes sense.

I will bring in Iain Hockenhull to say whether anyone said anything during the consultation that could be construed as negative.

As you are aware, convener, registration to vote is a rolling poll and we keep updating our information all the time. The communication will say that the individual is a postal voter and ask whether they wish to retain their postal vote. It is up to each individual to ensure that that happens.

I do not believe that any analysis has been done, but I am saying that from hearsay. I ask Iain Hockenhull to give you some solid facts on the matter.