Electoral Fraud investigation

I do, Ana. Just not this one.
Does it matter?

It wasn't 'an attack' durhamjen. I genuinely wondered why you never seem to start threads yourself.

I was once doing the rounds of a large rural constituency with our candidate. When we had to stop for refreshment, the candidate couldn't be seen to buy any of us even a cup of tea, never mind a half of bitter. If someone from the opposition had seen him paying for drinks, they could have made trouble out of all proportion to the offence.

"That's ridiculous Jen - when we'd all finished canvassing we all adjourned to a local hostlery."

Was that supposed to be an apology, Anya?

Anya, it may seem ridiculous but that is the rule. It safeguards the candidate from allegations of bribery - those who follow it to the letter. As I am sure you know the reason why limits are put on is that the very rich cannot buy their way in as they did in the past.
In some occupations you cannot be an active member of a political party, although you can be a member. I found this out recently when my daughter applied for a position for a Local Authority. The form stated that this post had political restrictions on it. When we looked it up, if appointed, she would no longer have been able to deliver leaflets, canvass, run a Committee room, take up positions in her local party etc - anything that brought her into contact with the general public where she could influence the outcome of anything with a political connection for a particular party.
I agree that some of these restrictions seem petty in the light of modern life but they safeguard the electorate from bribery and corruption and the candidates from such allegations. They also make for a more level playing field. Heaven forbid we go down the route adopted by other countries where money is 'God'.

And I wasn't calling Jess ridiculous but the idea that someone couldn't buy volunteers a cup of tea. Don't see boggles where none exist

DJ if you intend to dish it out then you have to be prepared to take it. Your posts do often lower the tone of what has been a rare moment of genuine political debate on a thread. So I'm quite happy that my comment (or attack as you prefer to see it) was simply a warning that you need to post with a little more discretion.

I don't see WW , as an example, getting overly personal. She says what she has to say in a firm but polite manner and contributes to genuine debate as opposed to shouting down another's point of view.

Secondly I did make my point quite clearly, but then I don't expect you to have realised that. And in fact I agree that this infringement of rules has to be investigated and I suspect there was an element of possible shenanigans going on here.

Ana, that attack is pathetic.
Have you nothing to say on the subject?

Of course it has to be thoroughly investigated. If it is proved to be so then they do need to hold another election in those constituencies no matter what the numbers, even if only to confirm the validity of the candidate elected. We pride ourselves on having as honest an election as is possible, allowing for human error. In close contests every 'spoiled' vote is scrutinized by all parties to ensure fairness.

Nobody should get over excited and expect another GE!

I'm puzzled as to why you didn't start a thread about this when you mentioned it on the Government Watch thread on May 4th durhamjen. Why do you always wait for someone else to do it?

I do know the rules on spending for political parties djen .... But kind of you to point it out anyway. in terms of what is spent ( allowed) on canvassing, this was over what should have been spent but hardly a fortune.
I doubt many were persuaded to vote , I don't know anyone who responds to leaflets, calls at the door etc.
Of course it will be investigated, parties should stick to the correct amounts.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/05/07/if-there-is-trouble-ahead-look-to-the-conservatives-to-supply-it/

Good, this.

Yes, that whitewave, however it's spelt!
(imponderable I think)
And yes, you can prove fraud.

Surely it is then up to the Electoral Commission to decide what action to take next when or if any fraud was committed.

It doesn't matter, Jalima. What matters is if they spent too much in order to try and win a seat. That's fraud.
Was your seat targeted by the battle buses? If not, of course you didn't see one.

Don't get personal, Anya. Lowering the tone of the thread. Or at least, if you do, call the right person ridiculous..

Can't prove an impoderable (is that the right spelling?). But you can prove fraud.

That's ridiculous Jen - when we'd all finished canvassing we all adjourned to a local hostlery.

Fair enough, the people responsible for the fraud should be held to account.

But how many people saw a battle bus, were canvassed and changed their mind as a result? Impossible to know. And since one year has passed since then, other factors may have made people change their minds yet again. Or confirmed their opinion.

I certainly saw no sign of any buses and not a single person came to the door round here last year (unlike last week's election).

Oh yes I forgot that.

Our AM candidate was so careful about following the rules that she could not buy volunteers a cuppa (much to her embarrassment) as it could technically be a bribe to get someone to vote for her. That is an indication of how meticulous most candidates are - not "what's a dozen hotel bills between friends". This ties in with the infamous battle bus (the manager of which has been banned for life from Tory party) - allegations of excessive drinking and goings-on in hotels while on the road etc
Tory investigation of bullying by said manager still ongoing I think?

Try not t get personal please DJ you're lowering the tone of this thread.

There is a rule for a particular reason about how much can be spent. The Tories cheated. Shapps has already tried to distance himself.

But roses that's exactly why there are limits on the amounts that can be spend ....so it doesn't become a case of the richest individual or party being able to afford more and better methods of canvassing, leafleting, etc.