Image source, bbc

The Electoral Commission has previously said it would want to assess the wording of the question for a new Scottish independence vote even if it was the same one used in 2014.

A Scottish government official suggested this would be unnecessary as the question is already "tested".

Changing the wording of the question voters would be asked if there was a second Scottish independence referendum would be "very confusing", according to Mike Russell.

The Brexit secretary said there was a "clarity and consistency" to be gained from having the same wording as in the 2014 ballot, when people were asked: "Should Scotland be an independent country?"

He told MSP last week because this question was "still current" there was no need for the Electoral Commission to test it if there is another referendum in 2020 .

Read more.

Green MSP Patrick Harvie wonders about checking permissibility of donations.

Andy O'Neill suggests the governments of the UK should work together to allow participants to obtain registers.

Joined up registers would help people he explains.

SNP MSP John Mason wonders about organisations being given money before they are registered with the Electoral Commission.

Bob Posner says the vast bulk of the rules do not apply when there is some distance to an election.

There is a balance to be struck about how long before an electoral event the rules should begin to apply, he adds.

Mr Mason asks about reporting staffing costs and Mr Posner says the Commission has previously said this should be included as it seems "odd" that it is not part of the reporting regime.

Generally he calls for more detail on spending, highlighting the change towards digital campaigns too.

Image source, bbc

A Scottish group which gave money to the Conservative Party has been fined £1,800 by the Electoral Commission for not reporting donations properly.

The Scottish Unionist Association Trust gave hundreds of thousands of pounds to the party over a period of 17 years.

These donations were reported by the Conservatives, but a probe found SUAT "consistently failed to provide proper notification" to the election watchdog.

The group has accepted the Commission's findings and paid the fines.

An investigation by the Ferret website, external previously found that the SUAT donated £318,876 to the Conservatives between April 2001 and February 2018.

• Read more here
• Ex-Tory MP dismisses 'dark money' claims

Image source, bbc

Tory MSP Murdo Fraser asks if it is infinitely preferrable to address any breaches before a vote is cast, for afterwards its pretty irrelevant.

Bob Posner from the Electoral Commission says there is a deterrent to prevent people from breaking the rules but also the ability to investigate.

The current tools do not allow the Electoral Commission to act quickly, adds Mr Posner.

He points out health regulators can move very quickly and while it is not a matter of life and death, elections are pretty important, so he calls for the powers to move faster.

Dame Sue Bruce welcomes the bill, saying it will add clarity and guidelines for referenda in the future.

We think it will help provide assurance and confidence to the electorate and parliament, she adds.

Tory MSP Murdo Fraser asks about fines and enforcement.

Bob Posner says the prime aim of the Electoral Commission is compliance, and for this there needs to be deterrence and sanctions.

Fines must be proportionate but, where appropriate, we must be able to seek a high level of fine he adds.

The committee will now hear from:

• Dame Sue Bruce, the Electoral Commissioner for Scotland, external
• Bob Posner from the Electoral Commission, external
• Andy O'Neill, also from the Electoral Commission

The Electoral Commission would want to assess the wording of the question for a new Scottish independence vote even if it was the same one used in 2014.

A Scottish government official has suggested this would be unnecessary as the question is already "tested".

But the election watchdog said it would want to review the question in the light of possible new evidence.

The Scottish government said the 2014 vote provided a clear precedent for a simple, straightforward question.

Read more.

SNP MSP John Mason asks about comments about having more than one electoral event on one day.

Andy Hunter of the Association of Electoral Administrators says it does impact the pressures on organisers and can also create confusion for voters if there are differences between systems used.

Mr Conaghan says the cost of two separate events will be higher than a combined one.

But it does raise issues and confusion he adds, suggesting that the difference between the voting age between UK and Scottish elections could become an issue.

Image source, Getty Images

Changing the wording of the question voters would be asked if there was a second Scottish independence referendum would be "very confusing", according to Mike Russell.

The Brexit secretary said there was a "clarity and consistency" to be gained from having the same wording as in the 2014 ballot, when people were asked: "Should Scotland be an independent country?"

He told MSPs because this question was "still current" there was no need for the Electoral Commission to test it if there is another referendum in 2020 .

The commission has made clear it "firmly recommends" it should provide its "views and advice to the Scottish Parliament on the wording of any referendum question", regardless of whether it has previously done so.

Committee convener and Tory MSP Graham Simpson suggested it would be "better" for the independent Electoral Commission to "make a ruling or recommendation" on the question.

Trust in the electoral process is the currency of elections, Chris Highcock says, adding his organisation's role is in part to engender confidence in the process.

Mr Highcock says increasing cyber-security is being considered but there are limited resources.

Mr Conaghan says some of the "conspiracy theories" which arise after an electoral event come from a lack of knowledge.

He suggests more information could be put online to improve understanding.

Green MSP Patrick Harvie raises accountability around data and electoral donations.

Pete Wildman of the Scottish Assessors Association warns creating a national body of data could become quite a costly process, though he accepts there is an argument for a more standard data set.

There are four different electoral management systems in place in Scotland at the moment, he tells MSPs.

Witnesses agree standardising the format could be achievable without a national body to do so.

Tory MSP Murdo Fraser asks how essential the six month time frame, known as the Gould principle, is to run a referendum.

Mr Wildman concedes a referendum can be delivered on a shorter time frame but with higher risks.

Mr Highcock agrees, saying six months is the gold standard and reminds the committee where the Gould principle came from: the Scottish election issues in 2007.

Independent expert Ron Gould said the voters in that Holyrood election were "treated as an afterthought".

Mr Gould's report can be read here in full.

Chris Highcock explains that for the independence referendum, guidance was created by the chief counting officer which set out step by step how to interpret the legislation.

This took some time but guidance is key to supporting the process, he says.

Guidance for referendums can change between them and depending on how it is created he adds.

Mark Conaghan tells the committee the question is a matter for the politicians.

The SOLAR representative points to rushed elements of the EU referendum, he adds.

Mr Wildman explains there is more detail in this Referendums Bill than in Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, external (PPERA).

The witnesses agree there is less detail in the PPERA.

The PPERA:

• established the Electoral Commission;
• made provision about the registration and finances of political parties;
• made provision about donations and expenditure;
• and made provision about election and referendum campaigns and the conduct of referendums.

Tory MSP Adam Tomkins asks to what extent there should be concern about inconsistency between this bill and the previous legislation.

SOLAR's Mark Conaghan says differences between the Scottish and UK parliaments are not a concern, but it is important to have rules that can be turned to.

There is no consistency from the UK parliament on referendums, he adds, pointing to differences between the 2016 EU referendum and the 2011 alternative vote referendum.

Mr Tomkins expresses concern about the powers conferred on ministers under this bill - specifically the power to set questions and dates.

Chris Highcock suggests this is straying into policy areas on which he will not comment, but he does emphasise the more notice there is for a referendum, the better.

Image source, bbc

The question, date and campaign period for a future independence referendum would be set by ministers through secondary legislation if the Referendums (Scotland) Bill passes in its current form.

However, academics have warned this is a "retrograde step" and would be an "extraordinary power to confer to ministers".

Dr Alan Renwick from the Constitution Unit at University College London told the constitution committee that any referendum should be subject to the highest scrutiny in advance of it being called.

He expressed concern that secondary legislation tends to undergo less scrutiny than primary legislation, while also noting secondary legislation is not amendable.

Image source, bbc

Committee convener Bruce Crawford asks about seeing this bill through the sole prism of indyref2.

It is good to have a template, replies Mark Conaghan, citing a set of rules that can be worked through.

Pete Wildman adds it is about certainty about planning the delivery of elections, with the exact franchise known.

Chris Highcock points out the key part is time and not viewing the focus as a single event, nor for the focus to be on one question.