What is the "Tory election fraud" people are tweeting about?
10 of 12
Wouldn't it be ironic if there was a forced General Election and the Tories won with an even bigger majority? What would people start pursuing then?
Whilst the allegations need investigating and obviously acting upon, there is a danger that a certain amount of mischievous gloating could seriously backfire. As it stands, there is a general election due in 3 years and 11 months. A Labour Government could easily be elected if the situations and right management are in place. But, call an election now, and you could end up with 8 years of the Tories!
There's a thought!
Also, if the Tories are found guilty, do you think that they will keep quiet about any Labour equivalence that they discover? Can of worms I say. Can of worms.
Whilst the allegations need investigating and obviously acting upon, there is a danger that a certain amount of mischievous gloating could seriously backfire. As it stands, there is a general election due in 3 years and 11 months. A Labour Government could easily be elected if the situations and right management are in place. But, call an election now, and you could end up with 8 years of the Tories!
There's a thought!
Also, if the Tories are found guilty, do you think that they will keep quiet about any Labour equivalence that they discover? Can of worms I say. Can of worms.
Originally Posted by RRL:
“We already have a long thread on this topic
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2149174”
“We already have a long thread on this topic
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2149174”
Apologies. I searched through the first couple of pages and didn't see anything there.
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Wouldn't it be ironic if there was a forced General Election and the Tories won with an even bigger majority? What would people start pursuing then?
Whilst the allegations need investigating and obviously acting upon, there is a danger that a certain amount of mischievous gloating could seriously backfire. As it stands, there is a general election due in 3 years and 11 months. A Labour Government could easily be elected if the situations and right management are in place. But, call an election now, and you could end up with 8 years of the Tories!
There's a thought!
Also, if the Tories are found guilty, do you think that they will keep quiet about any Labour equivalence that they discover? Can of worms I say. Can of worms.”
“Wouldn't it be ironic if there was a forced General Election and the Tories won with an even bigger majority? What would people start pursuing then?
Whilst the allegations need investigating and obviously acting upon, there is a danger that a certain amount of mischievous gloating could seriously backfire. As it stands, there is a general election due in 3 years and 11 months. A Labour Government could easily be elected if the situations and right management are in place. But, call an election now, and you could end up with 8 years of the Tories!
There's a thought!
Also, if the Tories are found guilty, do you think that they will keep quiet about any Labour equivalence that they discover? Can of worms I say. Can of worms.”
Of course it's always a possibility that the Tories could get re-elected if a general election was forced, but I would suspect that possibility would be seriously diminished if the cause for that election were to be proof of illegal election expense accounting. An election would not be called as a result of 'mischevious gloating', but it would be called in the event of proof of illegal activity.
Originally Posted by rufusindigo:
“Apologies. I searched through the first couple of pages and didn't see anything there.”
“Apologies. I searched through the first couple of pages and didn't see anything there.”
no problem it happens now and again especially as the search facility isn't working properly
Originally Posted by rufusindigo:
“Of course it's always a possibility that the Tories could get re-elected if a general election was forced, but I would suspect that possibility would be seriously diminished if the cause for that election were to be proof of illegal election expense accounting. An election would not be called as a result of 'mischevious gloating', but it would be called in the event of proof of illegal activity.”
“Of course it's always a possibility that the Tories could get re-elected if a general election was forced, but I would suspect that possibility would be seriously diminished if the cause for that election were to be proof of illegal election expense accounting. An election would not be called as a result of 'mischevious gloating', but it would be called in the event of proof of illegal activity.”
I didn't say an election would be called due to mischievous gloating. But I implied that there was a lot of mischievous gloating going on by DS posters.
And as for "illegal activity". Most people already believe politicians are bent, in the event of an election, they would still vote for the party they support. Look at Labour and the Iraq conspiracies. Didn't stop them winning in 2005. Blair was hated back then too.
Originally Posted by rufusindigo:
“Apologies. I searched through the first couple of pages and didn't see anything there.”
“Apologies. I searched through the first couple of pages and didn't see anything there.”
you have nothing to apologise for..
according to your link this is a "fresh Conservative election scandal"
it was only reported yesterday, and has not been discussed in the other thread.
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Wouldn't it be ironic if there was a forced General Election and the Tories won with an even bigger majority? What would people start pursuing then?
Whilst the allegations need investigating and obviously acting upon, there is a danger that a certain amount of mischievous gloating could seriously backfire. As it stands, there is a general election due in 3 years and 11 months. A Labour Government could easily be elected if the situations and right management are in place. But, call an election now, and you could end up with 8 years of the Tories!
There's a thought!
Also, if the Tories are found guilty, do you think that they will keep quiet about any Labour equivalence that they discover? Can of worms I say. Can of worms.”
“Wouldn't it be ironic if there was a forced General Election and the Tories won with an even bigger majority? What would people start pursuing then?
Whilst the allegations need investigating and obviously acting upon, there is a danger that a certain amount of mischievous gloating could seriously backfire. As it stands, there is a general election due in 3 years and 11 months. A Labour Government could easily be elected if the situations and right management are in place. But, call an election now, and you could end up with 8 years of the Tories!
There's a thought!
Also, if the Tories are found guilty, do you think that they will keep quiet about any Labour equivalence that they discover? Can of worms I say. Can of worms.”
Unlikely that there'd be a general elecion but a series of by-elections in the constituencies affected could happen, and the best the tories could hope for is what they have now.
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Wouldn't it be ironic if there was a forced General Election and the Tories won with an even bigger majority? What would people start pursuing then?”
“Wouldn't it be ironic if there was a forced General Election and the Tories won with an even bigger majority? What would people start pursuing then?”
Of course, that is always a possibility with any election, as for people 'pursuing' something, you sound as though you think people should just ignore law breaking, surely not?
Quote:
“Whilst the allegations need investigating and obviously acting upon, there is a danger that a certain amount of mischievous gloating could seriously backfire. As it stands, there is a general election due in 3 years and 11 months. A Labour Government could easily be elected if the situations and right management are in place. But, call an election now, and you could end up with 8 years of the Tories!”
“Whilst the allegations need investigating and obviously acting upon, there is a danger that a certain amount of mischievous gloating could seriously backfire. As it stands, there is a general election due in 3 years and 11 months. A Labour Government could easily be elected if the situations and right management are in place. But, call an election now, and you could end up with 8 years of the Tories!”
gloating? did you read some of the threads here after the Tories 'massive' victory last May?,
again, of course there is a possibility that the Tories might get re-elected, if the allegations of their breach of the electoral laws are proven true by the courts and this forces another election,
but it's not very likely to happen under Cameron's leadership, also any of those almost 30 (and rising) Tory MPs who may be found guilty of criminal behaviour will at least be banned from holding political office for three years, and quite possibly (although very unlikely) be in prison for a year too.
Quote:
“Also, if the Tories are found guilty, do you think that they will keep quiet about any Labour equivalence that they discover? Can of worms I say. Can of worms.”
“Also, if the Tories are found guilty, do you think that they will keep quiet about any Labour equivalence that they discover? Can of worms I say. Can of worms.”
I would ask why they are not coming forward right now if they have evidence of law breaking by Labour or any other political party? perhaps it's because they have none?
(it was investigative journalists from Channel four who first indicated that there may have been electoral fraud by the Tories, not the Labour party)
Because ALL law breaking by ANY political parties should be thoroughly investigated, although to be honest, I can't imagine any other party being accused of it on such a massive scale,
Why are they not opening this 'can of worms' right now?
have you any evidence of this wormy can yourself? and if you have why haven't you contacted the proper authorities with it?
OR, could it be just desperate wishful thinking in the hope that if others are guilty of gross electoral misconduct then it somehow makes the Tories appear less so?
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“I didn't say an election would be called due to mischievous gloating. But I implied that there was a lot of mischievous gloating going on by DS posters.”
“I didn't say an election would be called due to mischievous gloating. But I implied that there was a lot of mischievous gloating going on by DS posters.”
NO!!! Gloating? on DS? never, I am pleased to see that you don't like to see such things,.............
Quote:
“And as for "illegal activity". Most people already believe politicians are bent, in the event of an election, they would still vote for the party they support. Look at Labour and the Iraq conspiracies. Didn't stop them winning in 2005. Blair was hated back then too.”
“And as for "illegal activity". Most people already believe politicians are bent, in the event of an election, they would still vote for the party they support. Look at Labour and the Iraq conspiracies. Didn't stop them winning in 2005. Blair was hated back then too.”
Obviously not hated enough though eh? and the full horror of the ramifications and enormous death toll had not really began to hit home in 2005, and at this point I must point out that almost the entire Tory party supported Blair whereas over 130 Labour MPs (Jeremy Corbyn amongst them) voted against his war.
Originally Posted by ShaunIOW:
“Unlikely that there'd be a general elecion but a series of by-elections in the constituencies affected could happen, and the best the tories could hope for is what they have now.”
“Unlikely that there'd be a general elecion but a series of by-elections in the constituencies affected could happen, and the best the tories could hope for is what they have now.”
Exactly this. And i read someone jokingly state Cameron would play this lack of a legitimately elected govt card when a parliamentary vote of no-confidence is coming his way sometime after the EU ref (obviously he won't before anyone takes that literally)
Originally Posted by OLD HIPPY GUY:
“Of course, that is always a possibility with any election, as for people 'pursuing' something, you sound as though you think people should just ignore law breaking, surely not?
gloating? did you read some of the threads here after the Tories 'massive' victory last May?,
again, of course there is a possibility that the Tories might get re-elected, if the allegations of their breach of the electoral laws are proven true by the courts and this forces another election,
but it's not very likely to happen under Cameron's leadership, also any of those almost 30 (and rising) Tory MPs who may be found guilty of criminal behaviour will at least be banned from holding political office for three years, and quite possibly (although very unlikely) be in prison for a year too.
I would ask why they are not coming forward right now if they have evidence of law breaking by Labour or any other political party? perhaps it's because they have none?
(it was investigative journalists from Channel four who first indicated that there may have been electoral fraud by the Tories, not the Labour party)
Because ALL law breaking by ANY political parties should be thoroughly investigated, although to be honest, I can't imagine any other party being accused of it on such a massive scale,
Why are they not opening this 'can of worms' right now?
have you any evidence of this wormy can yourself? and if you have why haven't you contacted the proper authorities with it?
OR, could it be just desperate wishful thinking in the hope that if others are guilty of gross electoral misconduct then it somehow makes the Tories appear less so?”
“Of course, that is always a possibility with any election, as for people 'pursuing' something, you sound as though you think people should just ignore law breaking, surely not?
gloating? did you read some of the threads here after the Tories 'massive' victory last May?,
again, of course there is a possibility that the Tories might get re-elected, if the allegations of their breach of the electoral laws are proven true by the courts and this forces another election,
but it's not very likely to happen under Cameron's leadership, also any of those almost 30 (and rising) Tory MPs who may be found guilty of criminal behaviour will at least be banned from holding political office for three years, and quite possibly (although very unlikely) be in prison for a year too.
I would ask why they are not coming forward right now if they have evidence of law breaking by Labour or any other political party? perhaps it's because they have none?
(it was investigative journalists from Channel four who first indicated that there may have been electoral fraud by the Tories, not the Labour party)
Because ALL law breaking by ANY political parties should be thoroughly investigated, although to be honest, I can't imagine any other party being accused of it on such a massive scale,
Why are they not opening this 'can of worms' right now?
have you any evidence of this wormy can yourself? and if you have why haven't you contacted the proper authorities with it?
OR, could it be just desperate wishful thinking in the hope that if others are guilty of gross electoral misconduct then it somehow makes the Tories appear less so?”
Because its a non issue about how to attribute the costs of a bus that travelled around the country There's probably countless cases of other battle buses , involving other parties. No evidence of any intent, and no evidence of any impact.
Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe:
“Because its a non issue about how to attribute the costs of a bus that travelled around the country There's probably countless cases of other battle buses , involving other parties. No evidence of any intent, and no evidence of any impact.”
“Because its a non issue about how to attribute the costs of a bus that travelled around the country There's probably countless cases of other battle buses , involving other parties. No evidence of any intent, and no evidence of any impact.”
Did you read the linked article? Its not about Battle buses, the accusation is about phone canvassing on an industrial scale that alegedly promoted Conservative candidates.
1. Is that legal? (Regards the representation of the peoples act)
2. If so, is it local or national spending?
Quote:
“The Electoral Commission’s guidance says:
Party spending is “spending on campaigning to promote the party and its policies generally. For example, national newspaper adverts for the party, or leaflets explaining party policy.”
Candidate spending is “campaigning to promote a particular candidate or candidates in their local area. For example, leaflets or websites that focus on one or more candidates and their views.””
“The Electoral Commission’s guidance says:
Party spending is “spending on campaigning to promote the party and its policies generally. For example, national newspaper adverts for the party, or leaflets explaining party policy.”
Candidate spending is “campaigning to promote a particular candidate or candidates in their local area. For example, leaflets or websites that focus on one or more candidates and their views.””
Originally Posted by Bacon&Eggs:
“Did you read the linked article? Its not about Battle buses, the accusation is about phone canvassing on an industrial scale that alegedly promoted Conservative candidates.
1. Is that legal? (Regards the representation of the peoples act)
2. If so, is it local or national spending?”
“Did you read the linked article? Its not about Battle buses, the accusation is about phone canvassing on an industrial scale that alegedly promoted Conservative candidates.
1. Is that legal? (Regards the representation of the peoples act)
2. If so, is it local or national spending?”
The phone canvassing issue is a an ambiguous one. From what I could make out, the phone calls were carried out by a Tory funded company that was representing the Tory party, not actually the Tory Party themselves. (Obviously loopholes exist and are exploited).
But is this any different from Labour backed Unions backing the Labour Party? After all, Labour's sponsors and :Labour's representatives would have received money from the Labour party to campaign and canvass for them.
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“The phone canvassing issue is a an ambiguous one. From what I could make out, the phone calls were carried out by a Tory funded company that was representing the Tory party, not actually the Tory Party themselves. (Obviously loopholes exist and are exploited).”
“The phone canvassing issue is a an ambiguous one. From what I could make out, the phone calls were carried out by a Tory funded company that was representing the Tory party, not actually the Tory Party themselves. (Obviously loopholes exist and are exploited).”
Makes no odds imo. If the party spent money on canvassing (regards the election) it has to be declared as election spending, nationally or locally.
Quote:
“But is this any different from Labour backed Unions backing the Labour Party? After all, Labour's sponsors and :Labour's representatives would have received money from the Labour party to campaign and canvass for them.”
“But is this any different from Labour backed Unions backing the Labour Party? After all, Labour's sponsors and :Labour's representatives would have received money from the Labour party to campaign and canvass for them.”
Regardless where the money comes from or who it goes to the spending of it, as part of an election campaign, has to be declared correctly.
I assume Labour have declared properly.
Originally Posted by Bacon&Eggs:
“Makes no odds imo. If the party spent money on canvassing (regards the election) it has to be declared as election spending, nationally or locally.
Regardless where the money comes from or who it goes to the spending of it, as part of an election campaign, has to be declared correctly.
I assume Labour have declared properly.”
“Makes no odds imo. If the party spent money on canvassing (regards the election) it has to be declared as election spending, nationally or locally.
Regardless where the money comes from or who it goes to the spending of it, as part of an election campaign, has to be declared correctly.
I assume Labour have declared properly.”
How do we know the Tories haven't declared properly in this instance?
Having a company canvassing on your behalf without actually being part of the election campaign through actual costs of that company rather than Tory headquarters or Tory coffers directly, is surely just a loophole that the electoral commission is aware of? It is no different to Trade Unions acting on behalf of the Labour Party for which Labour wouldn't need to declare as it is backed by the Unions and the Unions act independently. If Unions are allowed to do this type of thing but no other party can, then that actually gives other parties an unfair disadvantage.
I Think there are people who just can't get over the election result!
Originally Posted by marke09:
“Labour are under investigation too”
“Labour are under investigation too”
There is no evidence of this, could you provide a link?
Originally Posted by Tassium:
“There is no evidence of this, could you provide a link?”
“There is no evidence of this, could you provide a link?”
LOL. Time for you to reconsider this post perhaps
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showp...50&postcount=8
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/n...time-to-96705/
The admin error gets bigger and bigger...
Quote:
“
Judge Barron said: “The combination of circumstances before me is wholly exceptional and goes far beyond the usual circumstances that would exist in a typical case where election expenses are being investigated.”
There was “very significant public interest in the matter being fully investigated,” he added.
“The consequences of a conviction would be of a local and national significance with the potential for election results being declared void"”
“
Judge Barron said: “The combination of circumstances before me is wholly exceptional and goes far beyond the usual circumstances that would exist in a typical case where election expenses are being investigated.”
There was “very significant public interest in the matter being fully investigated,” he added.
“The consequences of a conviction would be of a local and national significance with the potential for election results being declared void"”
The admin error gets bigger and bigger...
Looks like these claims will be investigated after all http://news.sky.com/story/1705394/po...expenses-probe
10 of 12
