Talk:Electoral Administration Act 2006

Politics of the United Kingdom High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums

Commonwealth and Irish peers

Lady Kinnock said in the House of Lords on 10 December: ‘It appears that the Electoral Administration Act 2006 may have inadvertently cast doubts on whether Commonwealth and Republic of Ireland citizens were eligible for membership of the House. That was clearly not Parliament's intention when passing the Act. Some months ago, the Government were alerted to the matter. Since then, we have undertaken discussions within government to find a way to address it. We recognise the seriousness of the issue. To put it beyond doubt and remove any uncertainty, we will introduce appropriate legislation before the end of the current Session. Only one or two clauses would be required.’[1] What exactly is the problem with the Act? – Kaihsu (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it is s 18 (certain Commonwealth citizens) that causes a problem; or maybe it was hidden in the repeals: s 74(2). I sent a Freedom of Information request to find out. – Kaihsu (talk) 13:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After some study, I think the problem came from repeals/amendments of the Act of Settlement 1700. But I have not pinpointed it yet. – Kaihsu (talk) 22:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The written statement sheds a little more light on it. It is something to do with a modification to "section 3 of the Act of Settlement 1701". Road Wizard (talk) 22:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; a parsed version is here: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wms/?id=2009-12-15a.241.0 It appears that each of s 3 Act of Settlement 1700, (the section that gave effect to) Sch 7 of British Nationality Act 1981, and s 18 of the present Act was awkwardly drafted. As Lord Bach said, ‘The relevant provisions are complex.’ – Kaihsu (talk) 01:45, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A section of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 claims to clarify this. 121a0012 (talk) 07:13, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delicate drafting

Schedule 2, to be given effect by s 74(2), would repeal s 68 of this same Act(!). Each of the abovementioned two sections, on passing of the Act, awaited respective commencement ordered by the Secretary of State: s 77. I have not read enough British statutes to know if such delicate drafting is typical. – Kaihsu (talk) 13:28, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Mr Zero None of the Above"

In spite of what is stated in this article, there seems to be a "None of the Above" type candidate standing in Bristol South this year. See this newspaper article for details. Either the statement in the WP article is wrong, or "Mr Zero None Of The Above" will not be allowed to stand, surely? Loganberry (Talk) 12:20, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, that would only apply to the name of the party, " result in an elector being misled as to the effect of his vote" (s49). However if he didn't change his name, but claimed "none of the above" was a common pseudonym, then he would likely be prevented under s21 ("commonly used name may be likely to mislead or confuse electors"). The article is naturally paraphrased somewhat, perhaps a bit too much in this case. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://electoralreform.wikicities.com/wiki/Electoral_Administration_Act_(UK)
Triggered by \bwikicities\.com\b on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 17:59, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Electoral Administration Act 2006. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Electoral Administration Act 2006. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]