I move amendment No. 161:
In page 28, subsection (1), line 6 to delete "20 of the First Schedule to the Act of 1977" and substitute "27 of the Second Schedule to the Act of 1997".
SECTION 35.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 162:
In page 28, lines 10 to 20 to delete subsection (2) and substitute the following:
"(2) (a) In relation to a candidate who contested both the original election and the fresh election in the constituency, the amount referred to in subsection (1) (a) of section 29 or in an order under subsection (1) of section 30, as may be appropriate, shall be increased by one half (having regard to section 3).
(b) The provisions of subsection (1) (b) of section 29 or subsection (1) (b) of section 30, as may be appropriate, shall apply in relation to a political party which presented a candidate at both the original election and the fresh election in the constituency.".
Section 35 provides for where due to the death of a candidate a fresh election is held in a constituency. It provides that the original election and the fresh election will be deemed to be a single election and for a party and-or candidates who contested the original election and also the fresh election, expenditure limits specified in section 29 will be increased by one half. That formula was appropriate to the situation where the Bill specified separate spending limits for a party and a candidate. This must be changed to take account of the revised formula which now relates to limits per candidate. This amendment provides for redrafting subsection (2) to provide that the spending limits for a candidate set out in the amended section 29 will be increased by one half. It also specifies that the arrangement in section 29 as amended whereby a party may with the agreement of the candidate incur a portion of the candidate's expenses will also apply to the candidate's limits increased by one half in the fresh election.
That might be reasonable if the death took place midway through the election campaign or before that, but if it happened the night before the poll, one would have to start again with an entirely new candidate. One would be at a great disadvantage in a new election. Why not allow a new fund?
The Chairman makes a reasonable point. It would be a disadvantage to somebody who had run previously.
It rarely happens but there could be a death within a day or two of an election.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 35, as amended, agreed to.