There are times when it is entirely appropriate to postpone elections. Such times include during a wartime emergency; we postponed general elections throughout the Second World War. We also postponed local elections following the outbreak of the Covid pandemic in 2020. But there are at present no such extreme circumstances and, hence, I believe, no democratic justification for the postponement of the right of people to choose their local representatives according to the timetable previously agreed by both Houses of Parliament.
I mention both Houses of Parliament in this context because this House is in a unique position in relation to the postponement of elections. While all other legislation can be subject to the Parliament Acts, no government majority in the House of Commons can force the postponement of a general election without the specific consent of the House of Lords. That constitutional protection is to prevent the abuse of power by a party with a majority in the other place changing the rules of democratic engagement.
There may be many reasons why this Government do not want there to be many local elections in May. There may be many reasons why some Conservative administrations do not want elections in May either. But fearing electoral consequences should not take away people’s right to vote. Without it, people will not have a say on issues such as the effective abolition of many local councils and their replacement by new authorities covering far wider areas and with great power vested in a single person.
I am sometimes asked what my view is of local government in this country. I believe that we should try it. I am grateful to Professor Tony Travers of the London School of Economics for pointing out to me that there are about 18,000 councillors in the UK—a figure soon to be reduced significantly—while in France there are 36,000 councils or communes. The UK is often cited as the most centralised government in the western world, notwithstanding the post-1999 constitutional settlements.
Do we, in an unelected Chamber, have the right to say no to this?
I believe that powers across both Houses cover general elections, but there are also more recent precedents concerning other levels of elections. My noble friend Lady Pinnock referred to the London mayoral elections of 2000, when the then Labour Government decided they wanted to bring in the London mayor and assembly elections but without the provision of a candidate’s election address in the traditional way. This House, with the support of Conservative Peers, considered this to be a significant abuse of power. Those elections were not allowed to take place until we had changed the rules to make them fairer.
The noble Baroness, Lady Scott of Bybrook, referred to the precedents for saying no—for fatal Motions—in these circumstances. I remind her and her colleagues of the words of the noble Lord Strathclyde:
“Since 1968, a convention has existed that the House of Lords should not reject statutory instruments (or should do so only rarely)”.
Lord Strathclyde, in his report on statutory instruments in 2015
The occasion in the year 2000 was one of those rare occasions, when I was supported by the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde. Several fatal Motions have also been carried out by this House on other occasions. I consider this to be an appropriate occasion for this House to say that Governments should not be allowed to postpone elections at the last minute in this fashion.