An exchange in the House of Lords this afternoon led Lord McNally, the Minister of State at the Ministry of Justice to exclaim, “Gosh, we are getting a lot of information today.” (contrast with David Cameron’s appearance this morning on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme)

Phil Willis (Lord Willis of Knaresborough) asked Her Majesty’s Government “what they estimate will be the costs of a general election held under the alternative vote system”.

Lord McNally replied that the costs of a general election under AV would be broadly the same as under the existing system. Any extra costs incurred by the count would be due to the extra time the process could take, and there are no plans to introduce counting machines.

From Hansard, the full exchange:

The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord McNally): My Lords, the features and associated costs of holding a general election using the alternative vote system would broadly be the same as under the existing system. A notable exception to this is the count, which, depending on the extent of preferences expressed by voters, could take longer and lead to some additional costs.

Lord Willis of Knaresborough: I am grateful to my noble friend for that interesting Answer. There is undoubtedly a polarised debate about the future of our voting system. However, does my noble friend agree that it behoves politicians in both Houses of Parliament, particularly Ministers, when making statements to base them on facts and not simply make them up to further an argument? Will he state quite clearly today that there is no requirement in the legislation and no estimate in the Government’s plans for any additional costs for electronic voting or electronic counting? Can he bury that argument?

Lord McNally: My Lords, reading very carefully, I say that we have no current plans to introduce electronic counting for the Westminster parliamentary elections. The Government have made no estimate of the costs of electronic counting for them.

Lord Campbell-Savours: Will the Minister confirm that the Scottish Government have introduced an electronic counting system for local government elections in Scotland, at a cost of £5 million next year—the contract has gone to a firm called Logica, which will be counting votes under STV and AV in by-elections—and that there is an electronic counting system operating in the London mayoral  counting effectively inevitable in the end?

Lord McNally: My Lords, whether it is inevitable in the end I simply do not know. As to the other information that the noble Lord imparted to the House, I am sure that it will, as ever, be accurate.

Lord Cormack: My Lords, is not the Minister correct and the noble Lord opposite also correct? There are no current plans but it is inevitable.

Lord McNally: Nothing is inevitable, including the outcome of the AV referendum.

Lord Kinnock: Will the Minister confirm that in 90 years of using alternative voting in Australia, no one has ever proposed or used machines for voting or counting under such a system? Will he also confirm that if there were alternative voting in a general election in this country, there is no proposal from anyone, no provision and no finance allocated for the introduction of machine voting? Will he advise people on both sides of this argument that it is disreputable as well as misleading to the electorate to make repeated claims, as some have, that it is necessary and inevitable that machines are used in AV voting systems?

Lord McNally: Gosh, we are getting a lot of information today. This is all extremely useful for the electorate. In less than 48 hours, the power will pass to them. I have always been one of those politicians who trusts the people and I will wait to find out what they say. As to the earlier point on the Australian experience, the noble Lord is perfectly right.