Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Undefined discussion subject.

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited May 2016 in General

imageUndefined discussion subject.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    First like Trump
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    edited May 2016
    The Tories won fairly. I don't think Labour's heart was in it. They put up Ed Miliband for flip's sake.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Labour's heart still isn't in it. Why else would they put up Jeremy Corbyn?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    SkyNews running with Jezza cornered at PMQs over anti-Semitism as soundbite
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274

    SkyNews running with Jezza cornered at PMQs over anti-Semitism as soundbite

    And the BBC?
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    Lucky there's a shadow Govt in waiting to step in if OGHs hopes are realised...
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    edited May 2016
    In view of the seriousness of these charges [in truth nothing that all parties don't do, the difference being scale and winning], a snap general election might be the fairest solution.

    This might provide a likely boost to most of our wallets, but that is incidental.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    edited May 2016
    Multimillionaire internet marketing guru Michael Green Grant Shapps was on Daily Politics today denying he had anything to do with the campaign finances. He was pointing the finger at David Cameron's best friend, Lord Feldman.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    They could have been a bit more subtle than booking loads of hotel rooms in the name of "Mr. Conservatives"; say "Mr. M. Mouse", or "Mr. P. Nesshead."
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    If there are mass by elections the Tories will run with posters with Jeremy Corbyn in Alex Salmond's pocket......
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    Is there a list of the 26 seats?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    If found guilty, I would fine the Tories £50 for every £1 they are judged to have broken spending limits by.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    This comes to what is classed as local spending, always a murky area.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    The problem with crick allegations etc is trying to prove the value of several travelling buses that went around the country. Even crick has said it is hard to separate it all out, instead all he has done is totalled up a lot of costs and assigned them 100% to each individual constituency to come up with the claims they broke local funding rules.

    It is clearly a fudge Tories (and I bet labour etc) have used over the years to boost local support via national funding, but it is far from clear cut if they have just been exploiting a loophole or something more. Crick reports always contain phrases like it is "debatable" that etc etc etc
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Sadiq Khan : "This occurred during Gaza crisis and I said things I now realise I'd better not say our loud" https://t.co/8nVwBf0gih
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669

    The problem with crick allegations etc is trying to prove the value of several travelling buses that went around the country. Even crick has said it is hard to separate it all out, instead all he has done is totalled up a lot of costs and assigned them 100% to each individual constituency to come up with the claims they broke local funding rules.

    It is clearly a fudge Tories (and I bet labour etc) have used over the years to boost local support via national funding, but it is far from clear cut if they have just been exploiting a loophole or something more. Crick reports always contain phrases like it is "debatable" that etc etc etc

    It's the law and no-one is above it.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    Sean_F said:


    They could have been a bit more subtle than booking loads of hotel rooms in the name of "Mr. Conservatives"; say "Mr. M. Mouse", or "Mr. P. Nesshead."

    John Smith was the old favourite. I don't think it's just about fairness but a sense that the Tories are hardly a political movement any more, just a well funded advertising machine based in W1. Of course the activists are genuine but needing a mobile army to be bussed around the provinces.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited May 2016

    The problem with crick allegations etc is trying to prove the value of several travelling buses that went around the country. Even crick has said it is hard to separate it all out, instead all he has done is totalled up a lot of costs and assigned them 100% to each individual constituency to come up with the claims they broke local funding rules.

    It is clearly a fudge Tories (and I bet labour etc) have used over the years to boost local support via national funding, but it is far from clear cut if they have just been exploiting a loophole or something more. Crick reports always contain phrases like it is "debatable" that etc etc etc

    It's the law and no-one is above it.
    What the law says & what the Tories have done is unclear is they broke it or have been exploiting a loophole & that is before you get to if 100% of the cost should be assigned to each constituency eg sometimes they stayed outside of it, they could claim the overnight was so they could get to the next days visit (should the cost be 100% or 50/50).

    I can see all sorts of arguments that not 100% of the cost of the bus is local or national.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    General Election now!

    Kick the corrupt Tories out!!!

    This is serious stuff - why isn't this making the news? Establishment cover-up?
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536

    Sadiq Khan : "This occurred during Gaza crisis and I said things I now realise I'd better not say our loud" https://t.co/8nVwBf0gih

    Ah well that's OK then.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Travelling buses have always been counted as a national, not local, expense haven't they? Which count towards national cost limits. There was nothing innovative, unique or original here - nor any attempt at dishonesty.

    If they're to count against the local expenses then that should be said beforehand. The Electoral Commission ought to be clear as what is and is not counted and how it will be broken down.

    Either set the rules clearly or just go down the American route and abolish spending limits.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,387
    I'll give you 4/1 if you think there will be a single election-spending by-election before the end of the year related to this story.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    runnymede said:

    Sadiq Khan : "This occurred during Gaza crisis and I said things I now realise I'd better not say our loud" https://t.co/8nVwBf0gih

    Ah well that's OK then.
    If he's not to say it out loud does he still think that way and would act based on those thoughts, but just not say it?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    murali_s said:

    General Election now!

    Kick the corrupt Tories out!!!

    This is serious stuff - why isn't this making the news? Establishment cover-up?

    Because its much ado about nothing. Just dishonest bean counting from Crick trying to make a story up.
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536

    I'll give you 4/1 if you think there will be a single election-spending by-election before the end of the year related to this story.

    Well, exactly.
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    SkyNews running with Jezza cornered at PMQs over anti-Semitism as soundbite

    And the BBC?
    No - they weren't cornered (but they should be - witness their reporting - Oh and what happened to the Balen report?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I see Cameron has made a total berk of himself over Trump yet again. At PMQs no less.
  • JonCisBackJonCisBack Posts: 911
    Whingeing about irregularities and asking for a re-run worked so well for Gerry Malone...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_by-election,_1997

    Crick is a massively irritating prat who hates tories. I trust sense will prevail and this will come to nothing and we can get on with more important issues.

    If anyone genuinely thinks that a few activists on a bus handing out leaflets swung the election they are delusional. As a rule zealots of any party wearing rosettes and enthusiastically thrusting leaflets into my hand put me off rather than persuade me
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    Can this thread be regarded as nothing better than CRICK-bait?

    :lol::lol::lol:
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957

    Whingeing about irregularities and asking for a re-run worked so well for Gerry Malone...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_by-election,_1997

    Crick is a massively irritating prat who hates tories. I trust sense will prevail and this will come to nothing and we can get on with more important issues.

    If anyone genuinely thinks that a few activists on a bus handing out leaflets swung the election they are delusional. As a rule zealots of any party wearing rosettes and enthusiastically thrusting leaflets into my hand put me off rather than persuade me

    I like Crick, he goes where the story is. He did so much to help Andrew Mitchell
  • TimGeoTimGeo Posts: 20
    It would be interesting to see of course if all the union's expenditure ( both in terms of Staff, resources and funds) in supporting Labour Candidates were also declared and applied against election expenses.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822

    Whingeing about irregularities and asking for a re-run worked so well for Gerry Malone...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_by-election,_1997

    Crick is a massively irritating prat who hates tories. I trust sense will prevail and this will come to nothing and we can get on with more important issues.

    If anyone genuinely thinks that a few activists on a bus handing out leaflets swung the election they are delusional. As a rule zealots of any party wearing rosettes and enthusiastically thrusting leaflets into my hand put me off rather than persuade me

    I like Crick, he goes where the story is. He did so much to help Andrew Mitchell
    Because he hates the police more than Tories...
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Apart from PB I have never heard one person mention it..
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    SkyNews running with Jezza cornered at PMQs over anti-Semitism as soundbite

    And the BBC?
    Aunty has the shortest PMQs coverage I think I’ve ever seen, just a 1:08 minute segment regarding Syrian children.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    Mike: The anti-semite jibe, like Cameron's at PMQs, is going to dog Corbyn for as long as he's leader
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,761
    I've been thinking about that PMQs today and the conclusion that I have come to is that the Speaker (as usual) really fell down on the job. Cameron should simply not have been allowed to do what he did. He pretty much ignored the questions that Corbyn asked (something to do with poverty and education, I think) and asked questions of him with a series of serious accusations and charges fully exploiting Parliamentary privilege.

    I suspect that Cameron was expecting to get stopped but as the Speaker did not intervene he just kept going and going. PMQs it wasn't. PMQs supposedly ran for a record 41 minutes today but in truth there was a 10 minute interval for Questions from the PM.

    The Speaker may well take the view that party leaders are supposed to be big boys and girls who can look after themselves and it is not his job to protect them but questions went unanswered today and some particularly vicious bullying went on right under the Speaker's nose. Corbyn is an over-promoted fool with delusions of competency who is not fit for the office he aspires to but that really wasn't nice. I am far from sure that Parliament is enhanced by something like that.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Leftie? Put them all to death. By torture. Yesterday.

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Runnymede...In Israel they have to be prepared for a Gaza crisis every day... 24.7.365
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    DavidL said:

    I've been thinking about that PMQs today and the conclusion that I have come to is that the Speaker (as usual) really fell down on the job. Cameron should simply not have been allowed to do what he did. He pretty much ignored the questions that Corbyn asked (something to do with poverty and education, I think) and asked questions of him with a series of serious accusations and charges fully exploiting Parliamentary privilege.

    I suspect that Cameron was expecting to get stopped but as the Speaker did not intervene he just kept going and going. PMQs it wasn't. PMQs supposedly ran for a record 41 minutes today but in truth there was a 10 minute interval for Questions from the PM.

    The Speaker may well take the view that party leaders are supposed to be big boys and girls who can look after themselves and it is not his job to protect them but questions went unanswered today and some particularly vicious bullying went on right under the Speaker's nose. Corbyn is an over-promoted fool with delusions of competency who is not fit for the office he aspires to but that really wasn't nice. I am far from sure that Parliament is enhanced by something like that.

    'an over-promoted fool with delusions of competency'

    A description that would fit the Speaker even better I think.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Was working so missed PMQ can I watch it now. I know I asked before but in an airport. Working off a phone so can't easily identify the link.

    * note to self - save it this time
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    runnymede said:

    DavidL said:

    I've been thinking about that PMQs today and the conclusion that I have come to is that the Speaker (as usual) really fell down on the job. Cameron should simply not have been allowed to do what he did. He pretty much ignored the questions that Corbyn asked (something to do with poverty and education, I think) and asked questions of him with a series of serious accusations and charges fully exploiting Parliamentary privilege.

    I suspect that Cameron was expecting to get stopped but as the Speaker did not intervene he just kept going and going. PMQs it wasn't. PMQs supposedly ran for a record 41 minutes today but in truth there was a 10 minute interval for Questions from the PM.

    The Speaker may well take the view that party leaders are supposed to be big boys and girls who can look after themselves and it is not his job to protect them but questions went unanswered today and some particularly vicious bullying went on right under the Speaker's nose. Corbyn is an over-promoted fool with delusions of competency who is not fit for the office he aspires to but that really wasn't nice. I am far from sure that Parliament is enhanced by something like that.

    'an over-promoted fool with delusions of competency'

    A description that would fit the Speaker even better I think.
    Squeaker was the same last week. He's normally very interventionist - something has changed his behaviour.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good afternoon, everyone.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    Moses_ said:

    Was working so missed PMQ can I watch it now. I know I asked before but in an airport. Working off a phone so can't easily identify the link.

    * note to self - save it this time

    No need to watch, Cliffnotes are very simple...

    Corbyn - waffle waffle waffle, I am against Antisemitism.

    Cameron - What about your friends Hamas and Hezbollah.

    Corbyn - Waffle

    Cameron - Come on, denounce calling them friends.

    Corbyn - Waffle

    Cameron - Come one...

    Corbyn - Waffle....


  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Moses_ said:

    Was working so missed PMQ can I watch it now. I know I asked before but in an airport. Working off a phone so can't easily identify the link.

    * note to self - save it this time

    Can't see it yet on iPlayer
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,957
    The only seat I reckon where the result could have been even remotely influenced in 2015 by a one day visit by a battle bus would be The Gower.

    Adrian Sanders, the LibDem candidate in Torbay and previous MP, was on social media on the day they appeared belittling these Tory volunteers for being useless and not having a clue of their way around the constituency. But now he will no doubt be suggesting that single event lost him the seat.

    Yeah, right.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,957

    Leftie? Put them all to death. By torture. Yesterday.

    Seems rather extreme, but if you're offering...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    Anyhoo, Labour's impressive and mahoosive ground game should have been able to repel these alleged Tory shenanigans
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Jack Blanchard
    Here's the Q&A of Jeremy Corbyn's spokesman telling us Corbyn didn't *actually* say Labour won't lose seats tomorrow https://t.co/YZj7gqZR8I
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    They are going down fighting....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274

    Jack Blanchard
    Here's the Q&A of Jeremy Corbyn's spokesman telling us Corbyn didn't *actually* say Labour won't lose seats tomorrow https://t.co/YZj7gqZR8I

    Team Chairman Milne....GE campaign is going to be a cracker if he is still in charge. Better make sure the crap Elvis Impersonator is free for the whole month.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    Moses_ said:

    Was working so missed PMQ can I watch it now. I know I asked before but in an airport. Working off a phone so can't easily identify the link.

    * note to self - save it this time

    No need to watch, Cliffnotes are very simple...

    Corbyn - waffle waffle waffle, I am against Antisemitism.

    Cameron - What about your friends Hamas and Hezbollah.

    Corbyn - Waffle

    Cameron - Come on, denounce calling them friends.

    Corbyn - Waffle

    Cameron - Come one...

    Corbyn - Waffle....


    Ahh...... thanks for the "executive summawaffle"
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,957

    Jack Blanchard
    Here's the Q&A of Jeremy Corbyn's spokesman telling us Corbyn didn't *actually* say Labour won't lose seats tomorrow https://t.co/YZj7gqZR8I

    Team Chairman Milne....GE campaign is going to be a cracker if he is still in charge. Better make sure the crap Elvis Impersonator is free for the whole month.
    Labour better block-book thousands of beds for travelling activists in the Heartbreak Hotel....
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    Anyhoo, Labour's impressive and mahoosive ground game should have been able to repel these alleged Tory shenanigans

    Oh yes that reminds of the heady days of iOS where the Tories trembled at the roar of the Labour ground game .

    Wonder what happened to that little muppet.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,012
    edited May 2016
    We had a visit from the Battle Bus. Had a chat with some of the activists who'd come up on it - they had James Wharton posters and maps but had no idea where they were. But allegedly when knocking on doors asking about voting for the local candidate with local posters it wasn't actually about the local candidate but was actually a national campaign.

    BTW I have no knowledge whether Wharton declared it, whether or not it would tip him over his spending limit or even whether he is on the list. But the "its a national campaign" excuse from CCHQ is patent nonsense. We had a visit from Harriet Harpyperson in her godawful pink bus - that was a national campaign. The Tory Battle Bus was nationally organised but locally applied. Suggestions of "this is a non-story" clearly know more about electoral law than the Electoral Commission.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    "It is possible that criminal proceedings could be taken but what could be really troubling is if the elections in those seats were annulled and new votes would have to take place. Cameron could feasibly lose his majority."

    Is that even a possibility?
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    We had a visit from the Battle Bus. Had a chat with some of the activists who'd come up on it - they had James Wharton posters and maps but had no idea where they were. But allegedly when knocking on doors asking about voting for the local candidate with local posters it wasn't actually about the local candidate but was actually a national campaign.

    BTW I have no knowledge whether Wharton declared it, whether or not it would tip him over his spending limit or even whether he is on the list. But the "its a national campaign" excuse from CCHQ is patent nonsense. We had a visit from Harriet Harpyperson in her godawful pink bus - that was a national campaign. The Tory Battle Bus was nationally organised but locally applied. Suggestions of "this is a non-story" clearly know more about electoral law than the Electoral Commission.

    Talking of buses who could possibly forget this absolute total cluster feck from Labour at the last GE.

    http://tinyurl.com/z3z5xju
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191
    Moses_ said:

    Anyhoo, Labour's impressive and mahoosive ground game should have been able to repel these alleged Tory shenanigans

    Oh yes that reminds of the heady days of iOS where the Tories trembled at the roar of the Labour ground game .

    Wonder what happened to that little muppet.
    Given the number in recent days, I'm going to plump for "suspended by the Labour party"
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191

    Anyhoo, Labour's impressive and mahoosive ground game should have been able to repel these alleged Tory shenanigans

    ONE MILLION CONVERSATIONS
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    Jack Blanchard
    Here's the Q&A of Jeremy Corbyn's spokesman telling us Corbyn didn't *actually* say Labour won't lose seats tomorrow https://t.co/YZj7gqZR8I

    Team Chairman Milne....GE campaign is going to be a cracker if he is still in charge. Better make sure the crap Elvis Impersonator is free for the whole month.
    And better have plenty of northern Labour voters lined up ready to be denounced as bigots.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    It's certainly something to watch. It feels inherently unlikely though.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    Afternoon all :)

    The Standard's endorsement of Zac is about as surprising as the Sun rising in the east tomorrow morning. They've never eulogised him as they did Boris but they have and always will, I imagine, choose a Conservative over a Labour candidate.

    As to whether it will make a scintilla of difference - we'll see.

    As, according to Innocent, I am either stupid or vicious I'll have to see if I can utilise this insight as far as my Second Preference vote tomorrow is concerned.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957

    Anyhoo, Labour's impressive and mahoosive ground game should have been able to repel these alleged Tory shenanigans

    ONE MILLION CONVERSATIONS
    Five million conversations actually. They just didn't tell us most of them were 'I'm not voting Labour'

    http://labourlist.org/2015/04/miliband-says-labour-members-have-had-4-million-conversations-and-aims-for-a-million-more/
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Anyhoo, Labour's impressive and mahoosive ground game should have been able to repel these alleged Tory shenanigans

    ONE MILLION CONVERSATIONS
    With themselves
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    When will the Electoral Commission decide how things go on with the expenses investigation?
  • JasonJason Posts: 1,614
    RobD said:

    "It is possible that criminal proceedings could be taken but what could be really troubling is if the elections in those seats were annulled and new votes would have to take place. Cameron could feasibly lose his majority."

    Is that even a possibility?

    In the silly world of hyperbole, anything is possible. Anyway, Labour's silence over this issue has been deafening.

  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited May 2016
    'The story fuels a narrative the Tories didn't win fairly'

    Where is that 'narrative' beyond the minds of the most conspiracy theory obsessed leftist?

    Too many 'shrewdies' on here still can;t get beyond the fact their analysis of May 2015 was total horsesh8t. Just like their view that Trump had no chance at the nomination and remain would win the referendum comfortably.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited May 2016
    Does anyone know the process by which the one-year deadline can be extended and the criteria for doing so?
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    The Standard's endorsement of Zac is about as surprising as the Sun rising in the east tomorrow morning. They've never eulogised him as they did Boris but they have and always will, I imagine, choose a Conservative over a Labour candidate.

    As to whether it will make a scintilla of difference - we'll see.

    As, according to Innocent, I am either stupid or vicious I'll have to see if I can utilise this insight as far as my Second Preference vote tomorrow is concerned.

    I still don't know whether or not to use mine.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    Oh God. I can't get this out of my head

    https://twitter.com/ms_peaceweaver/status/727827762413735936
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Oh God. I can't get this out of my head

    twitter.com/ms_peaceweaver/status/727827762413735936

    Sensual
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,761
    David Icke was right all along? Incredible.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited May 2016
    murali_s said:

    Anyone who isn't a Tory is either stupid, vicious or both.

    Is it true that Paul Staines has offered to buy this site & OGH has turned into a kind of Soviet Commissar and refused to let market forces work?

    I think we should be told.

    You clearly haven't read the comments on Guido....
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited May 2016
    murali_s said:

    Anyone who isn't a Tory is either stupid, vicious or both.

    Is it true that Paul Staines has offered to buy this site & OGH has turned into a kind of Soviet Commissar and refused to let market forces work?

    I think we should be told.

    This man is far more influential than a thousand no-mark Guardian commentators writing a thousand articles defending progressivism on a thousand days.

    You may not like it, but it's true.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    The Tories won fairly. I don't think Labour's heart was in it. They put up Ed Miliband for flip's sake.

    That might come back to haunt you.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Indigo said:

    The Tories won fairly. I don't think Labour's heart was in it. They put up Ed Miliband for flip's sake.

    That might come back to haunt you.
    It's incredible that TSE even has to assert that. There are some on here that blame the voters for not going the way the polls suggested they would. They would seemingly prefer election by poll.

    They see the pollsters as unimpeachable scientists
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    Indigo said:

    The Tories won fairly. I don't think Labour's heart was in it. They put up Ed Miliband for flip's sake.

    That might come back to haunt you.
    You need your sarcasm detector to be serviced.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263

    Travelling buses have always been counted as a national, not local, expense haven't they? Which count towards national cost limits. There was nothing innovative, unique or original here - nor any attempt at dishonesty.

    If they're to count against the local expenses then that should be said beforehand. The Electoral Commission ought to be clear as what is and is not counted and how it will be broken down.

    Either set the rules clearly or just go down the American route and abolish spending limits.

    I've been slightly involved in this - the Mirror had a comment from me that it was "worrying" - but I've not got seriously engaged, since I think it has to be a non-partisan investigation, and I won't express an opinion on whether the law was broken. Labour is not getting involved either. But, without going into the claims in detail, it's not as simple a case as you think.

    Whatever the outcome, parties do need to know where they stand. Busloads of people presenting themselves in marginals as campaigners for a local candidate (there's plenty of evidence of that) and staying in local hotels at the party's expense certainly push the envelope of what "national" means. If it's legal, OK, we should all do it, but in general I think constituency spending limits should be tighter, not less tight. The same applies to other well-known borderline stuff - national letters to voters who happen to live in marginals, posters just outside the constituency but on the approach roads, central phone canvassing and social media stuff, etc. And yes, some of that gets done by all parties, which gives a better basis for a non-partisan commission to fix some more solid rules. The Fiona Jones case with its many twists and turns was a god example of how ambiguity can go horribly wrong.

    Incidentally, criminal prosecution for exceeding the spending limit is not dependent on whether the extra spending made a difference to the result. In that, it differs from minor breaches of electoral law (incorrect imprint on a leaflet, that sort of thing), where in practice I think the rule is that nobody is too bothered unless it probably changed the outcome.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    Anyone who isn't a Tory is either stupid, vicious or both.

    Is it true that Paul Staines has offered to buy this site & OGH has turned into a kind of Soviet Commissar and refused to let market forces work?

    I think we should be told.

    You clearly haven't read the comments on Guido....
    Nope.

    What am I missing?

  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    Anyone who isn't a Tory is either stupid, vicious or both.

    Is it true that Paul Staines has offered to buy this site & OGH has turned into a kind of Soviet Commissar and refused to let market forces work?

    I think we should be told.

    You clearly haven't read the comments on Guido....
    Nope.

    What am I missing?

    I wasn't actually reply to you, it appears murali_s's original comment has been deleted by forces unknown.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited May 2016



    [snip]
    Whatever the outcome, parties do need to know where they stand. Busloads of people presenting themselves in marginals as campaigners for a local candidate (there's plenty of evidence of that) and staying in local hotels at the party's expense certainly push the envelope of what "national" means. If it's legal, OK, we should all do it, but in general I think constituency spending limits should be tighter, not less tight. The same applies to other well-known borderline stuff - national letters to voters who happen to live in marginals, posters just outside the constituency but on the approach roads, central phone canvassing and social media stuff, etc.
    ...

    The distinction between local and national spending does seem rather artificial. For example, the Edstone was unveiled in what was seen as the key marginal of Hastings & Rye. That presumably wasn't coincidence - it wasn't engraved in Hastings, AFAIK, it was lugged there intentionally - so should its cost have counted towards the constituency expenditure*?

    * and if so, for which party? :)
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @ScottyNational: Ballot Paper:After feedback from the General Election, it please indicate who you want to represent you after the SNP candidate is suspended
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,543
    As far as I understand the legislation. If it can be established that

    - The electoral agent, who has sole responsibility for declaring expenses, made a false declaration. AND
    - the candidate is unable to demonstrate that he was unaware and and took reasonable steps to avoid false statements being made.

    ... then the elected MP will be struck off and can't stand again. The first points have to be proved, but if they are, the consequences are essentially automatic.

    The Lallands Peat Worrier blog has a fair amount about this in relation to Alistair Carmichael.

    What makes this tricky for the Conservatives in my view is that the non-declaration seems to have been systematic and was also done for the UKIP prompted by-elections prior to the general election. In this case the national campaign versus local campaign argument clearly doesn't apply, even though time limits prevent those elections being disputed.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Indigo said:

    The Tories won fairly. I don't think Labour's heart was in it. They put up Ed Miliband for flip's sake.

    That might come back to haunt you.
    You need your sarcasm detector to be serviced.
    I need some sleep, when you lot start getting home from work and the discussion starts getting interesting its after 2am here!
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    Anyone who isn't a Tory is either stupid, vicious or both.

    Is it true that Paul Staines has offered to buy this site & OGH has turned into a kind of Soviet Commissar and refused to let market forces work?

    I think we should be told.

    You clearly haven't read the comments on Guido....
    Nope.

    What am I missing?

    Actually some of your recent efforts/cries for help would fit in quite well there.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    taffys said:

    Indigo said:

    The Tories won fairly. I don't think Labour's heart was in it. They put up Ed Miliband for flip's sake.

    That might come back to haunt you.
    It's incredible that TSE even has to assert that. There are some on here that blame the voters for not going the way the polls suggested they would. They would seemingly prefer election by poll.

    They see the pollsters as unimpeachable scientists
    U ok hun?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    FF43 said:

    As far as I understand the legislation. If it can be established that

    - The electoral agent, who has sole responsibility for declaring expenses, made a false declaration. AND
    - the candidate is unable to demonstrate that he was unaware and and took reasonable steps to avoid false statements being made.

    ... then the elected MP will be struck off and can't stand again. The first points have to be proved, but if they are, the consequences are essentially automatic.

    The Lallands Peat Worrier blog has a fair amount about this in relation to Alistair Carmichael.

    What makes this tricky for the Conservatives in my view is that the non-declaration seems to have been systematic and was also done for the UKIP prompted by-elections prior to the general election. In this case the national campaign versus local campaign argument clearly doesn't apply, even though time limits prevent those elections being disputed.

    I don’t ever recall being offered hotel or travel expenses when going to help Liberal candidates in the Good Old Days.

    I’ve got to say, withough going through Lallands Peat Worrier blog in detail, I find it difficult to conceive of many people being bussed (or whatever) into Orkney & Shetland!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    TNS London Mayoral Poll fieldwork ended yesterday

    First preference: Sadiq Khan (45%), Zac Goldsmith (33%), Others combined (21%)

    Including second preferences: Sadiq Khan (57%), Zac Goldsmith (43%)

    http://www.tnsglobal.co.uk/press-release/tns-poll-sadiq-khan-course-be-next-london-mayor
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Does anyone know the process by which the one-year deadline can be extended and the criteria for doing so?

    As soon as some long grass is found the decision will be taken.

  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    Shows Why Cameron felt free to offer the referendum. In May 2015 the gap was 20%
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/the-rise-of-donald-trump-should-terrify-all-conservatives/

    The Spectator continues it's evolution into the New Statesman.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited May 2016
    weejonnie said:

    twitter.com/britainelects/status/727868809110016000

    Shows Why Cameron felt free to offer the referendum. In May 2015 the gap was 20%
    For some reason (moving average no doubt) the gap keeps growing despite no polls during that period. Remove the outliers at ~60% and the average hasn't changed all that much.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    runnymede said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    Anyone who isn't a Tory is either stupid, vicious or both.

    Is it true that Paul Staines has offered to buy this site & OGH has turned into a kind of Soviet Commissar and refused to let market forces work?

    I think we should be told.

    You clearly haven't read the comments on Guido....
    Nope.

    What am I missing?

    Actually some of your recent efforts/cries for help would fit in quite well there.
    I'm glad your sarcasm detector is in good order...

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,543

    FF43 said:

    As far as I understand the legislation. If it can be established that

    - The electoral agent, who has sole responsibility for declaring expenses, made a false declaration. AND
    - the candidate is unable to demonstrate that he was unaware and and took reasonable steps to avoid false statements being made.

    ... then the elected MP will be struck off and can't stand again. The first points have to be proved, but if they are, the consequences are essentially automatic.

    The Lallands Peat Worrier blog has a fair amount about this in relation to Alistair Carmichael.

    What makes this tricky for the Conservatives in my view is that the non-declaration seems to have been systematic and was also done for the UKIP prompted by-elections prior to the general election. In this case the national campaign versus local campaign argument clearly doesn't apply, even though time limits prevent those elections being disputed.

    I don’t ever recall being offered hotel or travel expenses when going to help Liberal candidates in the Good Old Days.

    I’ve got to say, withough going through Lallands Peat Worrier blog in detail, I find it difficult to conceive of many people being bussed (or whatever) into Orkney & Shetland!
    I wasn't clear in my comment. The legal point LPW was making was that the Representation of the People Act is very prescriptive. If it's found that expenses were falsely declared and the candidate didn't take reasonable measures to prevent it, there will be a series of by-elections. No ifs or buts.

    LPW is very anti-Carmichael btw.
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    FF43 said:

    As far as I understand the legislation. If it can be established that

    - The electoral agent, who has sole responsibility for declaring expenses, made a false declaration. AND
    - the candidate is unable to demonstrate that he was unaware and and took reasonable steps to avoid false statements being made.

    ... then the elected MP will be struck off and can't stand again. The first points have to be proved, but if they are, the consequences are essentially automatic.

    The Lallands Peat Worrier blog has a fair amount about this in relation to Alistair Carmichael.

    What makes this tricky for the Conservatives in my view is that the non-declaration seems to have been systematic and was also done for the UKIP prompted by-elections prior to the general election. In this case the national campaign versus local campaign argument clearly doesn't apply, even though time limits prevent those elections being disputed.

    I don’t ever recall being offered hotel or travel expenses when going to help Liberal candidates in the Good Old Days.

    I’ve got to say, withough going through Lallands Peat Worrier blog in detail, I find it difficult to conceive of many people being bussed (or whatever) into Orkney & Shetland!
    Think of it this way - if the 100 Tory marginals are declared to have overspent then there should be plenty of interesting betting opportunities.

    (How does Paddy Ashdown uneat his hat?)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,761

    Does anyone know the process by which the one-year deadline can be extended and the criteria for doing so?

    I don't think this is right. In terms of s89 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 as amended the appropriate officer must make available the return of a candidate for 2 years from the date of receipt and make copies of it available to anyone that asks on payment of a modest fee. After that he is entitled to destroy them.

    Not everything in this legislation makes sense but it would seem surprising if the return has to be available for 2 years but is only capable of being challenged for 1 year after the election.

    The time limits for an election petition are very short and set out in s122. Basically, as far as I can see there is 28 days in which to lodge such a petition, that period starting 10 days after the return was received or should have been received. I think I am right in saying the return should be lodged within 35 days of the election.

    Unless there is some other provision that I have not found from my quick skim I am really not sure what the story is talking about. It may be that there is some other power given to the Electoral Commission which is not available to Joe Public.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    taffys said:

    They are going down fighting....
    I find your lack of faith distirbing.

    As if MI7 will allow Khan to become Mayor...
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited May 2016
    DavidL said:

    Unless there is some other provision that I have not found from my quick skim I am really not sure what the story is talking about. It may be that there is some other power given to the Electoral Commission which is not available to Joe Public.

    Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 Sch.9 Part 2

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/41#schedule-9-part-II
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    weejonnie said:

    FF43 said:

    As far as I understand the legislation. If it can be established that

    - The electoral agent, who has sole responsibility for declaring expenses, made a false declaration. AND
    - the candidate is unable to demonstrate that he was unaware and and took reasonable steps to avoid false statements being made.

    ... then the elected MP will be struck off and can't stand again. The first points have to be proved, but if they are, the consequences are essentially automatic.

    The Lallands Peat Worrier blog has a fair amount about this in relation to Alistair Carmichael.

    What makes this tricky for the Conservatives in my view is that the non-declaration seems to have been systematic and was also done for the UKIP prompted by-elections prior to the general election. In this case the national campaign versus local campaign argument clearly doesn't apply, even though time limits prevent those elections being disputed.

    I don’t ever recall being offered hotel or travel expenses when going to help Liberal candidates in the Good Old Days.

    I’ve got to say, withough going through Lallands Peat Worrier blog in detail, I find it difficult to conceive of many people being bussed (or whatever) into Orkney & Shetland!
    Think of it this way - if the 100 Tory marginals are declared to have overspent then there should be plenty of interesting betting opportunities.

    (How does Paddy Ashdown uneat his hat?)
    That was going through my mind too!
    I can’t though believe the Tories would be that contemptuous of the law/plain stupid.
This discussion has been closed.