Voter Identification (Amendment of List of Specified Documents) (Northern Ireland) Regulations 2026

My Lords, in speaking to these regulations, I will speak also to the Voter Identification (Amendment of List of Specified Documents) (Local Elections) (Northern Ireland) Order 2026 and the Local Elections (Northern Ireland) (Uprating Election Expenses) Order 2026. These statutory instruments make certain changes to the electoral system in Northern Ireland. They will make participation in elections more accessible to more people in Northern Ireland, and will bring certain rules governing Northern Ireland elections closer in line with those in Great Britain. The first instrument updates the list of permissible forms of ID that can be used by voters at polling stations at parliamentary and Assembly elections in Northern Ireland. The second instrument makes identical changes to the list for local elections in Northern Ireland. The third instrument will uprate expenditure limits for candidates standing in local elections in Northern Ireland to reflect rising costs due to inflation; an equivalent uplift in the spending limit for reserved elections in Great Britain and for UK Parliament and Assembly elections in Northern Ireland was approved by Parliament in 2023. Before I proceed further, I draw the Committee’s attention to the correction slip for the local elections draft order, which corrects a minor typographical error. In the last paragraph on page 1, the words “on Him section” have been amended to “on Him by section”. This refers to Section 84 of the Northern Ireland Act, which allows Northern Ireland’s local election rules to be amended by Order in Council, and “Him” refers in this context to His Majesty the King—one would have thought that would be slightly more polite than “Him”. I turn to the specifics of the first and second instruments. The documents being added to the list of acceptable IDs that can be used by voters at polling stations are a Commonwealth passport, a Proof of Age Standards Scheme card, an HM Armed Forces veteran card and a blue badge from the disabled person’s parking scheme in Northern Ireland and Great Britain. These forms of ID are already accepted at polling stations in the rest of Great Britain. Adding to the list of acceptable IDs will support participation in elections for a range of people in Northern Ireland. The Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland and the Electoral Commission are both supportive of this change. It is vital to ensure that those who cast their vote are eligible to do so. Photographic ID is an important step in the process of protecting this important principle of elections and maintaining trust in Northern Ireland’s electoral institutions and processes. Producing photographic ID at polling stations has been a requirement in Northern Ireland elections for more than 20 years. It is a well-understood, established part of voting. The list of acceptable IDs in Northern Ireland has historically been more restrictive than the list in Great Britain and is updated less frequently. Expanding the list of acceptable ID will remove barriers to voting and support more people in Northern Ireland—including some of the most vulnerable in society—to participate in our democracy, while retaining important security measures. I will now set out in more detail the measure in the third instrument relating to uprating local election candidate expenditure. This draft order will uprate the spending limits for candidates in Northern Ireland’s local elections. The limit will increase from £600 plus 5p per elector registered to vote in the district electoral area in which they are standing to £960 plus 8p per elector registered to vote in the district electoral area. This will bring the spending limit in Northern Ireland into line with the spending limits for local elections in England. The current spending limits in Northern Ireland have remained unchanged since 2005. Consequently, candidates contesting local elections face a disadvantage as compared with those contesting parliamentary and Assembly elections in Northern Ireland. They are also at a disadvantage as compared with those contesting local elections in England, where spending limits were uprated in 2023. Democracy relies upon the ability of political parties, candidates and other campaigners to communicate their views, so that voters can make an informed decision. The current limit means that local election candidates in Northern Ireland are restricted by lower real-terms spending on their campaign, which impacts on their ability to communicate with voters. The Electoral Commission has been consulted on these changes, in line with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland’s statutory duty, and is supportive of the new measures. In conclusion, these draft instruments are necessary to support more people in Northern Ireland to participate in and engage with our democracy. Expanding the list of acceptable voter IDs is an important step in updating electoral processes to reflect the modern electorate in Northern Ireland, while preserving the additional security features that are essential to maintain trust in Northern Ireland’s electoral system. Uprating local election campaign spending limits will ensure that those limits remain aligned in real terms with the original limits set by Parliament. I hope that, following my setting out of the details of these statutory instruments, the Committee will support them. I beg to move.

My Lords, I broadly welcome the three SIs before us. As the Minister has indicated, they fall into two categories: one aspect dealing with the widening of accessibility in terms of voter ID, and the second aspect dealing with the expense limits. I have said down the years that the use of voter identification has been positive in preserving our democracy. That is not to say that there have not been other problems with electoral fraud within Northern Ireland. One thinks of a particular example, which would probably be most familiar to the noble Lord, Lord Elliott, where a polling station was kept open beyond its hours, which had a material impact on the course of that electoral result. If one looks at the situation as regards postal votes, there have still been elements of electoral fraud done in relation to them, so we are not dealing with a perfect situation. However, broadly speaking, the electoral ID side of it has been beneficial to democracy in Northern Ireland, but it is not always watertight. To give perhaps one example, during an election a number of years ago, I remember calling at the house of an elderly lady who had requested a lift to the polling station. Obviously, in wanting to make sure that this was not a wasted journey, I said, “Just before we leave, have you got your photo identification with you?” At which point she said, “Hold on a moment, son”, and disappeared into the back room of her house. She emerged about five minutes later with a small photograph of herself. There was nothing else on it, just a photograph of her, and she said, “Look son, you can see it’s me in that photograph”. So, it is not absolutely watertight in that regard, but in most cases it has worked well. The changes being proposed today seem to make a level of sense in terms of accessibility. Of the four aspects, I welcome in particular the veteran card. We know that while there are other forms of identification, there will be some veterans who are always a bit anxious about what identification they have with them, so this is something which has a positive benefit. Perhaps I can ask one question of the Minister in relation to this. I may be asking about something which is not to hand but, while I would be supportive of each of the four elements, does the Minister have any breakdown of the numbers that are used in Northern Ireland for each of those? Specifically, is there any indication of the number of people for whom these would be the sole means of identification, so how much are we guaranteeing widening accessibility? It would be useful to have that information, if not now then perhaps in writing. The second aspect is, obviously, the level of election expenditure. I have come here from the Chamber, where there are major issues about financial support from outside the United Kingdom and talk of crypto millions, et cetera. When we are dealing with local government elections, the kind of money that we are talking about is an awful lot less, but where we have the limits at present is causing real difficulties because they have not been updated for a number of years. I know going back, for example, to the 2023 election, for the vast bulk of candidates, their only expenditure was on perhaps a piece of canvass material, something that would be given to the Post Office for a postal drop, and maybe some posters. We are not talking about high-tech, extravagant costs, particularly as costs in terms of printing have accelerated, I believe, at a rate beyond that of inflation. I know that in the last local government elections a number of candidates found themselves unable to do all those aspects, particularly some candidates in Belfast where the electorate tends to be larger per DEA than in other areas. They simply had to say as regards a postal drop that they could not afford the printing and remain within limits. That is a particular problem, not simply because it reduces the level of democracy when people are not in a position to obtain that information, but because some unscrupulous candidates falsify the expense that they go to and try to get their material at an artificially reduced level to remain within the limit. These are very sensible proposals as regards that level of expenditure. It bring us into line with the rest of the United Kingdom in terms of those levels and, from the point of view of candidates from whichever party, or indeed independents, it puts it within a realistic level for next year’s local government elections—so I support the proposals that have been put forward.

My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Weir, on this issue. First, I welcome my noble friend Lady Anderson to the Dispatch Box representing the NIO. This the first occasion on which I have had an opportunity to take part in a debate with her on Northern Ireland. I support these SIs because they underpin trust in the electoral system and the principle of democratic accessibility by ensuring that people have access to the franchise to exercise their vote. I welcome the fact that the number of identification documents has been increased, and I welcome the blue badge, because many people have blue badges, but until now in Northern Ireland they could not use them for electoral identification purposes. I recall that in 1985 when electoral identification was introduced the noble Lord, Lord Dodds, and I were candidates in the local government elections, him in Belfast, and me in Down, we were told just a few weeks before the election took place that they were going to be subject to electoral identification and documents. At that stage, it was medical cards, then it moved on to allowance, child benefit or pension books—then photographic ID came into play, as the Minister outlined, 20-odd years ago. It is important that we were in the vanguard for identification for eligibility to vote. Obviously, there were very good reasons for that. Political parties, in the main on the constitutional side, demanded that level of support, shall we say, for those who wanted to exercise their mandate. I recall—and I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Weir, in relation to this issue of electoral fraud—that some agents are particularly adept at undertaking electoral fraud. When I was a candidate in 2017, people told me that they went to vote for me using photographic ID and could not vote because their votes had already been used. Obviously, some mechanism was used deliberately to falsify their identity. I would like to think, as I am sure other noble Lords would like to ascertain, that means have been found to address those issues to ensure that that level of electoral fraud does not happen again. I welcome the instrument on spending limits in local government. There is another aspect: many candidates in Assembly and local government elections will use videos and social media to convey their messages because, as we know, many young people today use social media to gain information about elections. Therefore, we should ensure that spending limits cover that form of communication. With those few comments and the query on electoral fraud to which I have already alerted the Minister, I support these SIs and look forward to her response.

My Lords, I will speak briefly on these statutory instruments, which I welcome broadly for the reasons that my noble friend Lord Weir and the noble Baroness, Lady Ritchie, outlined. I have a couple of queries on which I would be grateful for the Minister’s response. First, on the identity documents that can now be used in local government elections, were any other documents or materials considered and not accepted by the Northern Ireland Office? Will the Minister outline whether other means of identity were considered but rejected and, if so, why? Secondly, on costs, the increase is quite substantial. The base figure is well over 30% and then it is nearly 33% per individual elector. Those are quite substantial increases, so could the Minister indicate when these figures were last upgraded and why there has been such a delay in bringing them up to an acceptable level, given that they have been increased by a substantial amount in one fell swoop? I remember, at the last local council elections, candidates and parties of all persuasions complaining bitterly about the restrictions on spending compared to elections elsewhere in the UK, so I would be grateful for that information. The Minister mentioned that part of this is to bring Northern Ireland into line with or align it closer with the rest of the UK. In that regard, I raise an issue that I have raised before—postal ballots. This pertains in Northern Ireland but not in the rest of the UK as, if someone does not receive a postal ballot that they have applied for and has been accepted as legitimate, it is possible to get a replacement issued by the electoral authorities in England and Wales but, in Northern Ireland, that has been refused for decades now, for some reason. When this has been raised previously, there has been some allusion to the issue of security, but in very vague terms. When one considers the amount of postal ballots that are sent out in Northern Ireland and across the country, the amount that would sent to replace lost ballots would be very small in comparison. I cannot understand why there is some problem with bringing Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the UK on an issue that concerns people’s right to vote. If somebody applies for a postal vote in good faith, and it does not arrive but there is still time to get another one by contacting the electoral office or going to collect it, it is very difficult for them to understand why they should be denied their vote, through no fault of their own where they have taken steps to receive a ballot. One or two people have been in touch with me about this. I would be grateful if the Minister could reply to that point.

My Lords, I will speak briefly to thank the Minister for her introduction of these SIs and to support them in both general and specific terms. I add one coda: these SIs come without an impact assessment, which is understandable enough in this context, but I keep thinking that we ought to have one at some future date. Today’s debate and the more general public debate about foreign money in UK elections are taking place for understandable reasons, but the fact of the matter is that Sinn Féin is easily the richest political party in Ireland. It is also the case that it is easily the most likely to receive money from outside Ireland from the United States of America. It has been my duty, as a professional historian, to read the very interesting memoirs of republicans, whom I knew well. Not one does not boast of an election fixed here or there at some point by the application of superior resources, semi-bullying or whatever. That is why I say that there is a case for a delayed impact assessment. These are good measures that ought, on the whole, to improve the honesty of elections in Northern Ireland and bring them closer to the rest of the United Kingdom, but I have this yearning for a real impact assessment.

My Lords, it is always a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Bew, with his historical perspective. I thank the Minister for her detailed introduction to these instruments. We on these Benches support all three measures; I shall, therefore, be extremely brief. Liberal Democrats have always had significant reservations about the introduction of voter ID at polling stations. We believe that it is extremely important that nothing is done to discourage people from voting. However, I understand that the particular circumstances in Northern Ireland required voter ID to be in place well before voter ID was introduced to the rest of the UK. I am, therefore, fully supportive of measures that increase the number of acceptable documents that can be used in polling stations in Northern Ireland, such as the Armed Forces veteran’s card, PASS—Proof of Age Standards Scheme—cards and the blue badge for the disabled persons’ parking scheme. I have a couple of quick questions for the Minister. First, I understand from the Explanatory Memorandum that “the permitted identity documents” will be kept “under review in consultation with the Electoral Commission and the Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland”. Following on from the question from the noble Lord, Lord Dodds, can the Minister say how frequently she expects additional forms of ID to be added, if appropriate? My second question goes slightly beyond the scope of these SIs. Given the Prime Minister’s enthusiasm for devolution, can the Minister say whether the Government are giving any consideration to reviewing local government in Northern Ireland, both in terms of expanding the powers and budget that local authorities in Northern Ireland have and on the wider question of the wider devolution settlement in Northern Ireland? I do not necessarily expect her to reply to that this evening, obviously, but perhaps it is something that we could discuss in a future debate or in more detail at a later stage.

My Lords, before I turn to the measures before us, this is the first opportunity that I have had to pass on publicly my sincere condolences to the family of Stephen Walker, a journalist in Northern Ireland of great professional integrity whom I knew for around 30 years. I commend both of his biographies—one of John Hume and the other of David Trimble. Stephen was only 61 years of age when he died a few days ago; it is very sad indeed. Secondly, I warmly welcome the Minister to the Dispatch Box. She will recall that, when we first faced each other, following the general election just over two years ago, I expressed some regret that Northern Ireland did not have a full-time Minister in your Lordships’ House. I am very pleased that that has now been rectified, and I sincerely congratulate her on her elevation to Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State.