Are you saying Cameron answered Jon's question regarding the QC?
he did answer it and got himself in a muddle just as Jon Snow got himself in a muddle with his eagerness to keep interrupting, that is why I said originally better to let DC talk and hang himself with his own words, but that is something you seem to have a problem with for some reason.
OK I am stopping here as I can see this is going to be a circular argument, feel free to have the last word
he did answer it and got himself in a muddle just as Jon Snow got himself in a muddle with his eagerness to keep interrupting, that is why I said originally better to let DC talk and hang himself with his own words, but that is something you seem to have a problem with for some reason.
OK I am stopping here as I can see this is going to be a circular argument, feel free to have the last word
Aw! I wanted to ask you what Camerons answer was, nvm. And I'd prefer you to get the last words.
The commission also considered a complaint that costs of bussing activists around the country had been wrongly declared in the national return, rather than attributed to specific seats, where a lower spending limit applies. It concluded there were "not reasonable grounds to suspect any offence" and did not launch a further investigation.
Well fortunately there's police involvement in many aspects of that rather than just the ostriches at the electoral commission.
Though I'm sure if it does yield a different result the level of whataboutery that it will provoke will bury the thread
No doubt. Still it will signal some resistance to buying local victories in strategicly targeted constituencies. It will allow the smaller parties to compete with the millionaire funded tories and the Union backed Labour party. This was surely the whole point of capping local spend in the first place. It's clearly being breached by the Tories, Cant say it's so clear with Labour although tbf it's not been my focus of attention.
A police investigation into whether the party spent more on local campaigns that the legal limit is believed to be targeting MPs in six constituencies, although at one stage 24 areas were being investigated.
Senior figures fear that the investigation outcome could void votes in a number of areas, triggering by-elections. Individuals in the party could also face criminal charges.
A police source told the paper that the result of the investigation would be sent to the Crown Prosecution Service within weeks.
Another police source said: “While there’s been a large number of investigations, it’s widely thought that they will make examples of one or two cases.”
Ministers, aides, and MPs told the paper that the investigation was causing a stir in No 10. “The problem for No 10 is that they do not know where this will end and they do not know who is leaking against them,” one source said. “They are deeply worried about this.”
A police investigation into whether the party spent more on local campaigns that the legal limit is believed to be targeting MPs in six constituencies, although at one stage 24 areas were being investigated.
Senior figures fear that the investigation outcome could void votes in a number of areas, triggering by-elections. Individuals in the party could also face criminal charges.
A police source told the paper that the result of the investigation would be sent to the Crown Prosecution Service within weeks.
Another police source said: “While there’s been a large number of investigations, it’s widely thought that they will make examples of one or two cases.”
Ministers, aides, and MPs told the paper that the investigation was causing a stir in No 10. “The problem for No 10 is that they do not know where this will end and they do not know who is leaking against them,” one source said. “They are deeply worried about this.”
Cool, more by elections
If it ever to came to that, the interesting thing is where will they take place and which of those constituencies voted Leave or Remain.
Six seats wouldn't make much sense if there has been fraud in more than six seats.
All the discussion will be around the possibility that the number of unsafe seats is greater than the Tory majority.
At that point it becomes a very big story.
The timing will also be interesting. It seems that the Operation Conifer report is due in June.
We don't yet know if the possible crimes that have been investigated are very, very serious or if they are "News Story of the 21st Century" serious.
We will have to wait.
The issue is with Central expenses v local expenses and affects Labour as well as Tories, with their "battlebuses".
The parties argue that the battlebus is paid for Centrally, so has nothing to do with the local candidates.
There have been complaints that the battlebuses should be locally charged against any local candidate where the buses attend.
You could argue it is the same situation as having Russell Brand rocking up to support a labour candidate in a by-election.
He stays in a 5-star hotel, etc etc.
Is his stay part of the "local expenses" to cover leaflets or posters - or a seperate thing altogether ??
My view is that if the local party prints posters and leaflets advertising Russell Brand speaking at a rally - then those
posters and leaflets are part of the local expnses.
Paying Russell Brand's Hotel bill should not be part of the local candidate's expenses.
Same applies to a battlebus
This is a grey area that should have been sorted out by the Election Conmmission,
but as we have seen with the referendum, some people like to get lawyers involved in things that annoy them.
These "6 seats" could be either of the 2 main parties
The issue is with Central expenses v local expenses and affects Labour as well as Tories, with their "battlebuses".
The parties argue that the battlebus is paid for Centrally, so has nothing to do with the local candidates.
There have been complaints that the battlebuses should be locally charged against any local candidate where the buses attend.
You could argue it is the same situation as having Russell Brand rocking up to support a labour candidate in a by-election.
He stays in a 5-star hotel, etc etc.
Is his stay part of the "local expenses" to cover leaflets or posters - or a seperate thing altogether ??
My view is that if the local party prints posters and leaflets advertising Russell Brand speaking at a rally - then those
posters and leaflets are part of the local expnses.
Paying Russell Brand's Hotel bill should not be part of the local candidate's expenses.
Same applies to a battlebus
This is a grey area that should have been sorted out by the Election Conmmission,
but as we have seen with the referendum, some people like to get lawyers involved in things that annoy them.
These "6 seats" could be either of the 2 main parties
Indeed.The people on the bus must be staying somewhere overnight so it seems rather random otherwise where those costs fall .They have to sleep somewhere. if it can't just be where the bus stops, the cost logically has to be at the national level.
The same would seem to apply to issues like targetted phone calls, from somewhere central - the costs are not going to be attributable to where the call centre is , or attributable to where the phones rang - its a national cost - unless all the calls fell in one constituency.
There's another question about May's adviser living in a hotel in the constituency - reportedly he claims he was working on national issues most of the time - which seems difficult to disprove.
But Kent police reportedly have 9 officers working on this - which itself looks a shameful waste of resources - and they may need to justify their expenditure by pursuing it.
The Commission is currently conducting an investigation into the Conservative Party’s 2015 General Election spending return and will consider carefully any new allegations that are raised as part of the Channel 4 News programme.
In line with the Commission’s Enforcement Policy, the Commission does not comment on on-going investigations, as to do so may hinder the conduct of the investigation.
These "6 seats" could be either of the 2 main parties
The Times story mentioned is about 6 of the Tory seats under investigation.
Despite my previous post.....6 unsafe seats would of course be significant. The Times are speculating about Criminal Charges against individuals.
The Tory majority in 2015 was of course 12. If 6 seats were taken from the LibDems by fraudulent means then of course.....there was arguably no majority.
If just 6 winning MPs independently broke the law to win their seats this would reduce the number of Conservatives in Westminster to the magic 325 and they'd no longer have a majority.
However the very real possibility of a Party wide conspiracy, systematically cheating to win, has attracted the Electoral Commission's eye - resulting in them requesting the involvement of various Police Authorities and the Crown (CPS) Prosecution Service - and, if proven, signals the end of Westminster as we know it.
Just imagine if everything the Conservative Gov't has enacted since 2015 turns out to have no democratic legitimacy.
Despite my previous post.....6 unsafe seats would of course be significant. The Times are speculating about Criminal Charges against individuals.
The Tory majority in 2015 was of course 12. If 6 seats were taken from the LibDems by fraudulent means then of course.....there was arguably no majority.
There would still have been a working majority however. You don't count the Speaker or Deputy Speakers (Cost 2 for Labour, and 1 Conservative), or 4 Sinn Fein seats. Hence why the current working majority is 17
Despite my previous post.....6 unsafe seats would of course be significant. The Times are speculating about Criminal Charges against individuals.
The Tory majority in 2015 was of course 12. If 6 seats were taken from the LibDems by fraudulent means then of course.....there was arguably no majority.
There would still have been a working majority however. You don't count the Speaker or Deputy Speakers (Cost 2 for Labour, and 1 Conservative), or 4 Sinn Fein seats. Hence why the current working majority is 17
The Ulster Unionists have also backed the Conservatives in the pastwhen there was only a tiny majority (Major Govt)
Surely, all that will happen, is if the Tories lose their overall majority, a general election will be called considering the opposition can't make up the numbers to form a Government. What better a reason for May to try and increase her majority?
Surely, all that will happen, is if the Tories lose their overall majority, a general election will be called considering the opposition can't make up the numbers to form a Government. What better a reason for May to try and increase her majority?
To be honest with you if several MPs get thrown out then I think May should call an election anyway as all parties were up to no good on spending and other breeches of election law before the last election.
Surely, all that will happen, is if the Tories lose their overall majority, a general election will be called considering the opposition can't make up the numbers to form a Government. What better a reason for May to try and increase her majority?
To be honest with you if several MPs get thrown out then I think May should call an election anyway as all parties were up to no good on spending and other breeches of election law before the last election.
IF the Tories are found to be guilty of anything,you can bet they will bring Labour into it too. Labour will likely have no choice to back a General Election.
Comments
BIB - Pity Jon Snow didn't remember that isn't it
Oh and I wasn't being naive just pointing out that there is more than one way to skin a cat
Are you saying Cameron answered Jon's question regarding the QC?
he did answer it and got himself in a muddle just as Jon Snow got himself in a muddle with his eagerness to keep interrupting, that is why I said originally better to let DC talk and hang himself with his own words, but that is something you seem to have a problem with for some reason.
OK I am stopping here as I can see this is going to be a circular argument, feel free to have the last word
Aw! I wanted to ask you what Camerons answer was, nvm. And I'd prefer you to get the last words.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37760562
It's not their job to investigate electoral abuse after all, that's down to the ...oh wait >:(
Well fortunately there's police involvement in many aspects of that rather than just the ostriches at the electoral commission.
Though I'm sure if it does yield a different result the level of whataboutery that it will provoke will bury the thread
No doubt. Still it will signal some resistance to buying local victories in strategicly targeted constituencies. It will allow the smaller parties to compete with the millionaire funded tories and the Union backed Labour party. This was surely the whole point of capping local spend in the first place. It's clearly being breached by the Tories, Cant say it's so clear with Labour although tbf it's not been my focus of attention.
Downing Street is “deeply worried” about a police investigation into allegations of electoral fraud in Tory seats during the 2015 general election, The Times reports
Cool, more by elections
What do the police mean by making examples of one or two cases? Surely, if fraud has been committed, then they all should be facing the music?
ETA:
https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/837966724792205312
Michael Crick says, up to six seats could be void.
If it ever to came to that, the interesting thing is where will they take place and which of those constituencies voted Leave or Remain.
How is that even possible?
All the discussion will be around the possibility that the number of unsafe seats is greater than the Tory majority.
At that point it becomes a very big story.
The timing will also be interesting. It seems that the Operation Conifer report is due in June.
We don't yet know if the possible crimes that have been investigated are very, very serious or if they are "News Story of the 21st Century" serious.
We will have to wait.
The issue is with Central expenses v local expenses and affects Labour as well as Tories, with their "battlebuses".
The parties argue that the battlebus is paid for Centrally, so has nothing to do with the local candidates.
There have been complaints that the battlebuses should be locally charged against any local candidate where the buses attend.
You could argue it is the same situation as having Russell Brand rocking up to support a labour candidate in a by-election.
He stays in a 5-star hotel, etc etc.
Is his stay part of the "local expenses" to cover leaflets or posters - or a seperate thing altogether ??
My view is that if the local party prints posters and leaflets advertising Russell Brand speaking at a rally - then those
posters and leaflets are part of the local expnses.
Paying Russell Brand's Hotel bill should not be part of the local candidate's expenses.
Same applies to a battlebus
This is a grey area that should have been sorted out by the Election Conmmission,
but as we have seen with the referendum, some people like to get lawyers involved in things that annoy them.
These "6 seats" could be either of the 2 main parties
Indeed.The people on the bus must be staying somewhere overnight so it seems rather random otherwise where those costs fall .They have to sleep somewhere. if it can't just be where the bus stops, the cost logically has to be at the national level.
The same would seem to apply to issues like targetted phone calls, from somewhere central - the costs are not going to be attributable to where the call centre is , or attributable to where the phones rang - its a national cost - unless all the calls fell in one constituency.
There's another question about May's adviser living in a hotel in the constituency - reportedly he claims he was working on national issues most of the time - which seems difficult to disprove.
But Kent police reportedly have 9 officers working on this - which itself looks a shameful waste of resources - and they may need to justify their expenditure by pursuing it.
From an article dated Thu 21st April 2016 http://www.libdemvoice.org/undeclared-conservative-election-expenses-unearthed-by-channel-4-news-50237.html
The Electoral Commission told Channel 4 News:
The Commission is currently conducting an investigation into the Conservative Party’s 2015 General Election spending return and will consider carefully any new allegations that are raised as part of the Channel 4 News programme.
In line with the Commission’s Enforcement Policy, the Commission does not comment on on-going investigations, as to do so may hinder the conduct of the investigation.
Presumably the investigations are still going on.
The Times story mentioned is about 6 of the Tory seats under investigation.
Despite my previous post.....6 unsafe seats would of course be significant. The Times are speculating about Criminal Charges against individuals.
The Tory majority in 2015 was of course 12. If 6 seats were taken from the LibDems by fraudulent means then of course.....there was arguably no majority.
If just 6 winning MPs independently broke the law to win their seats this would reduce the number of Conservatives in Westminster to the magic 325 and they'd no longer have a majority.
However the very real possibility of a Party wide conspiracy, systematically cheating to win, has attracted the Electoral Commission's eye - resulting in them requesting the involvement of various Police Authorities and the Crown (CPS) Prosecution Service - and, if proven, signals the end of Westminster as we know it.
Just imagine if everything the Conservative Gov't has enacted since 2015 turns out to have no democratic legitimacy.
isbuc.co.uk/expenses/
There would still have been a working majority however. You don't count the Speaker or Deputy Speakers (Cost 2 for Labour, and 1 Conservative), or 4 Sinn Fein seats. Hence why the current working majority is 17
The Ulster Unionists have also backed the Conservatives in the pastwhen there was only a tiny majority (Major Govt)
To be honest with you if several MPs get thrown out then I think May should call an election anyway as all parties were up to no good on spending and other breeches of election law before the last election.
IF the Tories are found to be guilty of anything,you can bet they will bring Labour into it too. Labour will likely have no choice to back a General Election.