Rigged 2014, 2015, 2016 UK elections? vote fraud

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Tom Griffin retweeted
George Eaton @georgeeaton

Tonight's @YouGov poll: Lab 35%, Con
33%, Ukip 14%, Lib Dems 7%, Greens 6%.

Polls stubbornly refusing to conform to
press narrative.

[TonyGosling]

The Fine Old English Gentleman: New Version
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/may/14/charles-dickens-gentlemen -poem-week
(To be said or sung at all Conservative dinners)

I'll sing you a new ballad, and I'll warrant it first-rate,
Of the days of that old gentleman who had that old estate;
When they spent the public money at a bountiful old rate
On ev'ry mistress, pimp, and scamp, at ev'ry noble gate,
In the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!

The good old laws were garnished well with gibbets, whips, and chains,
With fine old English penalties, and fine old English pains,
With rebel heads, and seas of blood once hot in rebel veins;
For all these things were requisite to guard the rich old gains
Of the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!

This brave old code, like Argus, had a hundred watchful eyes,
And ev'ry English peasant had his good old English spies,
To tempt his starving discontent with fine old English lies,
Then call the good old Yeomanry to stop his peevish cries,
In the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!

The good old times for cutting throats that cried out in their need,
The good old times for hunting men who held their fathers' creed,
The good old times when William Pitt, as all good men agreed,
Came down direct from Paradise at more than railroad speed …
Oh the fine old English Tory times;
When will they come again!

In those rare days, the press was seldom known to snarl or bark,
But sweetly sang of men in pow'r, like any tuneful lark;
Grave judges, too, to all their evil deeds were in the dark;
And not a man in twenty score knew how to make his mark.
Oh the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!

Those were the days for taxes, and for war's infernal din;
For scarcity of bread, that fine old dowagers might win;
For shutting men of letters up, through iron bars to grin,
Because they didn't think the Prince was altogether thin,
In the fine old English Tory times;
Soon may they come again!

But Tolerance, though slow in flight, is strong-wing'd in the main;
That night must come on these fine days, in course of time was plain;
The pure old spirit struggled, but its struggles were in vain;
A nation's grip was on it, and it died in choking pain,
With the fine old English Tory days,
All of the olden time.

The bright old day now dawns again; the cry runs through the land,
In England there shall be dear bread — in Ireland, sword and brand;
And poverty, and ignorance, shall swell the rich and grand,
So, rally round the rulers with the gentle iron hand,
Of the fine old English Tory days;
Hail to the coming time!

[scienceplease 2]

[insidejob]

This election result makes no sense unless you factor in vote fraud.

Why did votes dump Cable, Hughes and Balls but keep Clegg? Vote fraud.
Why did working-class Hastings vote Tory? Vote fraud.
Why did Labour take Lib Dem marginals but not many Tory marginals? Vote fraud.

200,000 ballot papers were knicked from a van, [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-england-32517842 [/url]

What does this tell you? There was an organised attempt at vote rigging. Clearly, it wasn’t just four people involved in it. If there were 200,000 ballots then perhaps hundreds of people would have been involved in vote rigging

Think about it. We are supposed to believe that the Lib Dem vote collapsed because of the anti-austerity vote. If so there must have been a massive anti-austerity vote in England. So, where did it go?

We are supposed to believe that the pro-austerity vote gave the Tories a majority. So, why didn’t the Lib Dems get any of that pro-austerity vote? If the story we are being told makes sense a minority of Lib Dem votes should have gone to Labour, much of those votes would have stayed with the Lib Dems and some Tory vote would have gone Lib Dem. But what we saw was a total collapse.

And now we are being told that there are no votes for Labour being Left and it should go to the right. In other words, it should become more like the Lib Dems.

What about the exist polls? Well, did you see Harriet Harman on BBC's election coverage talking about the Curtis exit poll? She said her experience of canvassing was that there was a lot of enthusiasm for Labour and his poll doesn't square with her experience. Curtis first said Tories would have the most seats then later said the Tories could have a majority. Why didn't his exit poll pick up that the Tories would get a majority?

I think the cabal decided on their Tory majority option at the same time that Cameron started putting emotion into his campaign and when Milliband said he would not do any deals with the SNP. The cabal was feaflul of the SNP so they fiddled the vote to lock them out of any decision making. The Curtis exit poll was a hoax.

We are being played.

[scienceplease 2]

Hi inside job,

Your post is blank, yet I can tell from the front page there was an interesting viewpoint.

Yet...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11560017/Postal-v oting-fraud-is-easy-electoral-commissioner-says.html

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Remember this little cookie from last year?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2578776/Scrap-postal-votes-ele ctions-fixed-says-judge-warns-ballot-rigging-probability-parts-Britain .html

Scrap postal votes or elections will be fixed, says judge who warns ballot-rigging is now a 'probability' in parts of Britain

By Jason Groves for the Daily Mail
23:30 11 Mar 2014, updated 00:06 12 Mar 2014
Open to abuse: Local election postal ballots are counted
Judge Richard Marvey, who presides over electoral fraud, made warning
He said introducing 'on demand' postal voting did not boost turnout
But it has opened the electoral system to fraud on 'an industrial scale'
|

Postal voting is ‘wide open to fraud’ and should be scrapped in its current form, a top judge warned last night.

Judge Richard Mawrey, who sits in judgment on election fraud cases, said ballot-rigging was now a ‘probability’ in some parts of Britain due to the extension of postal voting.

Open to abuse: Local election postal ballots are counted +3
Open to abuse: Local election postal ballots are counted
Mr Mawrey, a deputy high court judge, said the introduction of ‘on demand’ postal voting had failed to boost turnout. But he warned it had made Britain’s electoral system vulnerable to fraud on ‘an industrial scale’.

He told Radio 4’s File on 4 programme that in one case last year he had come across 14 different ways in which postal votes can be manipulated.

‘Postal voting on demand, however many safeguards you build into it, is wide open to fraud,’ he said.

‘It’s open to fraud on a scale that will make election rigging a possibility and indeed in some areas a probability.’

Mr Mawrey presided over a notorious 2004 ballot-rigging case in Birmingham which uncovered evidence of abuse he said would ‘disgrace a banana republic’.

Yesterday he added: ‘What has worried me about this for some time is the ease with which is it possible to commit postal vote fraud and the scale on which it can be committed.

‘In the past when you had personal voting, that is to say voting at polling stations, there was fraud but, frankly, it was minuscule. Postal voting on demand has enabled fraud to be carried out on what, in one case, I described as an industrial scale.’

MORE...
Lib Dem donors who gave Clegg's party £1.2million arrested over multi-million Rolls Royce corruption probe
Revealed: The £43m paid by elite group of donors for access to top Tories including David Cameron
Major £1 million Lib Dem donor at the centre of bribes probe wined and dined by Nick Clegg at government mansion
In January, the Electoral Commission warned it was concerned about 16 council areas in England, including Birmingham. It said police should mount patrols at polling stations in these ‘vulnerable’ areas.

The commission has also launched a study into concerns that some south Asian communities, notably those with roots in parts of Pakistan and Bangladesh, are particularly susceptible to electoral fraud.

But Electoral Commission chairman Jenny Watson yesterday said it would not be ‘proportionate’ to end postal voting altogether.

At risk: Sixteen council areas in England ought to be patrolled by police to prevent fraud, the Electoral Commission warned +3
At risk: Sixteen council areas in England ought to be patrolled by police to prevent fraud, the Electoral Commission warned
She said political parties should be forced to sign up to a new code of conduct, including a ban on activists handling postal ballot papers.

‘We are talking about the behaviour of unscrupulous campaigners who act in an improper way to put pressure on people,’ she said.

‘It is that behaviour that needs to be tackled.

‘You can’t punish voters for the behaviour of unscrupulous campaigners, and that’s what abolishing postal voting on demand would do.’

But others warned that further action may be needed to eradicate ballot-rigging.

Returning officer Ray Morgan, chief executive of Woking Borough Council, said: ‘I don’t think any election that I’ve presided over since 2006 has been totally fair and honest.’

Tory MP Andrew Stephenson said postal voting should be scrapped except in cases where voters could show they had a ‘genuine need’.

Mr Stephenson, MP for Pendle in Lancashire, said: ‘When you actually look in the UK and look at what’s going on in Pendle ...there is real fraud going on.

‘The Government should really look at this issue and really look at going back to only allowing postal votes to people who have a genuine need for a postal vote.

‘Everybody else should turn up at the polling station, like they always used to have to, in order to cast their vote.’

But Cabinet Office Minister Greg Clark said problems in a ‘small number of cases’ should not prevent the majority of law-abiding people having a postal vote.

‘Postal voting has proved very important in making sure that people can access the franchise,’ he said.

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Sorted
Visible now
BBcode was disabled

Yes, Tories take making every single postal vote, including overseas, count. Whereas Labour don't. But main problem IMO is truly dreadful, probably infiltrated, Labour party election strategy & communications team.
Hopeless at hammering home their strengths & Tory weaknesses. It just didn't happen. Their strategy seemed to be based around 'talk about the NHS a lot and convince everybody we're nice people.
Then there was the media, Bullingdon Club boy David Dimbleby letting that woman challenge Miliband again and again on Labour's 'overspending' without stopping her so if could answer. Then he tripped up walking off the stage.
With a half decent communications team and a real person for a leader like John Smith it would have been a walkover.

Poor leader, poor PR, all poisoned by the Labour right & their NWO chums.

[insidejob]

George Galloway alleges postal vote rigging, http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/george-galloway-takes-legal-action-overturn-b radford-west-election-result-1500635

Flood of last minute postal votes in Milton Keynes, http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/local/concerns-over-ballot-rigging- after-last-minute-flood-of-postal-votes-1-6730869

Ballot boxes found after vote declaration, http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/General-Election-2015-Vote-recounts-ord ered-Stoke/story-26463974-detail/story.html

It's OK to accuse Muslims of ballot rigging, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11590565/Muslims -ordered-not-to-vote-to-by-extremists.html

Whitehall Bin Man,
Thanks for allowing me to post.

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/05/02/revealed-eds-night-time-dash-to-c asa-brand-driven-by-postal-ballot-panic/
Revealed: Ed’s night-time dash to casa
Brand driven by postal ballot panic
by Atul Hatwal
Uncut has learned the real reason for Ed
Miliband’s sudden night-time visit to Russell
Brand’s Shoreditch home: panic caused by the
early tallies of postal ballots being fed back to
party HQ, from marginals around the country.
Labour is behind and urgently needs to reach out
to new voter groups. Russell Brand was a means
to that end.
Postal voting started in mid-April. Over 5 million
are expected to cast their ballot in this way and
over the last week, local teams from all parties
have attended postal vote opening sessions in
each constituency.
Although the parties are legally not allowed to
tally votes at these events, they all do and the
constituency teams then dutifully pass their field
intelligence back to HQ.
These are not opinion polls results or canvass
returns but actual votes, hundreds of thousands
of votes, from across Britain. Numbers have been
flowing from each marginal to party strategists to
give the most accurate picture of the current
state of play.
Labour insiders familiar with the
latest figures have told Uncut that the picture for
Labour in marginal seats, where it is fighting the
Tories, is almost uniformly grim.
Seats that canvass returns had suggested were
strong prospects for gains are much more finely
balanced and those that were close are swinging
heavily to the Tories.
The tartan scare is working with the fear of
McLabour shifting large numbers of wavering Lib
Dems and Ukippers into the Tory column.
National opinion polls and Lord Ashcroft’s last
swathe of constituency polling have seemed to
indicate a shift towards the Tories recently, but
Labour insiders say the effect on the ground in
marginals is much bigger than picked up in polls
so far.
Labour has already squeezed the Greens as much
as possible for votes, and is coming up short.
Despite a superior get-out-the-vote operation
primed and ready for next Thursday, Labour
cannot bridge the gap by organisation alone.
With just a few days to go until the election,
Labour desperately needs new voters.
This is why Ed Miliband suddenly changed his
plans and went to Russell Brand’s home to be
interviewed.
Even though Labour’s press team advised that
this would wipe-out Ed Balls’ planned offensive
the next day on Tory tax plans and dominate
media coverage, potentially for days, the decision
was made to go ahead with the interview.
The rationale was that beyond the direct reach of
Brand via his YouTube channel, and the millions
that follow him on Twitter , the media discussion
about Miliband’s interview would send a clear
signal to young people and non-voters that
Labour’s leader was different; that he would
listen to them and engage with their concerns.
Whether Brand gave Labour an endorsement or
didn’t (in the end he didn’t and backed Caroline
Lucas and the Greens for Brighton Pavillion) was
less important than sending this signal.
Given the intelligence that Lib Dems and Ukippers
were already switching to the Tories, there was
comparatively little downside to the choice with
an upside that the story was the highest profile
way to tip disaffected non-voters into
voting Labour.
The tactic is logical, but speaks to an epic failure
of strategy by Labour.
With just a few days left before polling, the party
finds itself scrambling to reach non-voters; it is
attempting to compress the work of years of
engagement into less than a week, to save the
election. Few expect this last minute gamble to
yield any returns.
The very thin silver lining to the disastrous postal
ballot field reports is Scotland: while the position
in is bad, it is not the total meltdown suggested
by the polls.
The opinion polls deal with Scotland as a whole
where the huge reserves of SNP support in places
like Glasgow deliver blow-out figures that suggest
almost every Labour MP will lose their seat.
However on a constituency basis, the distribution
of support is much more even and Labour is
competitive in seats that the polls suggest are
lost.
According to the postal ballot reports, over half of
Labour’s seats are genuinely winnable.
This is why so many Labour resources have been
moved north of the border and the party has
pivoted its campaign towards Scotland.
In recent days, Ed Miliband has been up in
Scotland answering Tory charges about a future
deal with the SNP, partially to try to address the
problems in English seats, albeit far too late to
have a major impact, but principally, to
nationalise the Scottish campaign.
For disaffected Labour voters, the choice is being
presented as Labour or Tory for the government
of Britain where a vote for the SNP would just let
the Tories in. For Tory and Lib Dem voters, the
choice is between a party committed to the union,
Labour, and one opposed, the SNP, where only a
vote for Labour will safeguard the union.
In both cases the national dimension is central
and Ed Miliband’s presence in Scotland, as
national leader, underpins this approach.
The past week has been bracing and ugly for
Labour strategists. The postal ballot intelligence
has destroyed any residual sense that Labour is
winning this campaign.
The priority now is to narrow the loss – the
Tories are likely to be the largest party but if
Labour can save enough Scottish seats, the result
might just be close enough for Labour to cobble
together a rainbow coalition to deny the Tories
government, even from second place.
If Labour cannot save sufficient numbers of
Scottish seats and results in England are as bad
as the postal ballots suggest, then there is the
real prospect of Labour entering the next
parliament with fewer seats than in 2010.
The last straw being clutched among the leader’s
advisers is that Labour’s vote, its base which has
been relentlessly targeted by canvassing teams,
is disproportionately under-represented in postal
ballots. It’s a hope shared by few outside of Ed
Miliband’s most committed coterie.
The election campaign is nearly over. After the
past week’s postal ballot reports, many
previously optimistic senior Labour MPs and
advisers fear the same is true for Labour’s
chances of returning to government, even as a
minority administration.
Atul Hatwal is editor of Uncut
Tags: Atul Hatwal , Ed Miliband

[insidejob]

It seems that the postal vote won the Tories the election, and it looks like they rigged it. The Tory vote went up by 1%, less than Labour, but I think most of the increase was in the marginals. Yet, Labour was outperforming the Tories in the marginals before the vote declaration.

Labour was winning the campaign war in the marginals, http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/04/is-there-a-proble m-with-the-tory-ground-war-in-the-marginals-and-if-so-how-big-is-it.ht ml

Labour was ahead in opinion polls in the marginals in March
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/03/poll-of-key-marginal- seats-finds-swing-towards-labour/

Below are some stories that suggest postal ballot rigging:

I left the computer I used to work out how many postal votes to give to the Tories in the ballot box. Opps! https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/572911/general-elec tion-2015-tablet-computer-found/

Postal ballot forms for a marginal goes missing: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/general-election-20 15-investigation-reports-9195178

[TonyGosling]

How Big Money and Big Brother won the British Elections
http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/how-big-money-and-big-brother-won-the -british-elections/

The Conservatives have won the 2015 elections with a slim majority. Labour and the Liberal Democrats suffered unexpected crushing defeats, prompting their leaders, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg, to resign. And despite winning a significant percentage of votes, UKIP only managed to win one seat, with its leader Nigel Farage also resigning after losing to a Tory MP.

But the Tory victory reveals precisely why British democracy is broken.

The ultimate determinant of which party won the elections was the money behind their political campaigns — the winning and losing parties correlate directly with the quantity of funding received. Yet there is also compelling evidence of another factor — interference from Britain’s security services.
The best democracy money can buy

As of the end of last year, the Electoral Commission found that the Tories received the largest amount of donations, at £8,345,687, the bulk of which came from financiers associated with banks, the hedge fund industry, and big business. Two million pounds worth of donations were associated with hedge funds, and a further £4 million with people attending private dinners hosted by senior Tories.

Next up in donations was Labour at £7,163,988, much of which came from trade unions, as well as corporate donors like PricewaterhouseCoopers, a major proponent of corporate tax avoidance; then the Liberal Democrats with £3,038,500, UKIP with £1,505,055, and the Green Party with £248,520.

That was last year. This year, donations continued to come in. In the final week of the campaign, the Tories managed to raise 10 times more donations than Labour — a total of a further £1.36 million — once again largely from hedge fund managers, property tycoons, and a telecoms firm that has avoided paying corporation tax in the UK since 2007.

Political parties appear to have achieved electoral success in direct proportion to the amount of money received to fund their political campaigns, indicating that the most important precondition for victory in Britain’s broken democracy is the party’s subservience to corporate power.
Oligarchy

The role of party donors in determining election outcomes — by determining the effectiveness and reach of national public relations campaigns — has consistently been overlooked by the main parties, despite some obligatory lipservice that has gone nowhere tangible.

Over the last five years, 41% of all individual and corporate donations to British party political-related causes have come from just 76 extremely wealthy people, including City financiers, corporate moguls, and owners of multi-million pound businesses.

Public relations spin has increasingly played a critical function in permitting corporate power to translate its wealth into political power.

In their study of the subject, A Century of Spin (2007), Prof. David Miller and Dr. William Dinan, sociologists and directors of the public interest investigations body, Spinwatch, show how the corporate co-optation of PR has been used to subordinate liberal democracies to corporate rule, and to limit the scope of populist grassroots movements to influence the political party system.

Under a climate of economic uncertainty and lack of independent sources of news and information, public opinion has become evermore vulnerable to slick partisan campaigns that mobilise wealth to create highly effective media spin by which to manipulate voters.
The Tory-UKIP money machine

While UKIP has positioned itself as an independent counterweight to the ‘establishment’ parties, standing up for swathes of under-represented working people, the truth is the opposite.

A large bulk of UKIP’s funding boost came from former Tory donors, millionaire bankers, and corporate executives, pushing the fringe party to receive the third largest percentage of the vote.

But not all these former Tory donors are former Tory donors.

‘Former’ Tory donor Robin Birley, for instance, who owns a Mayfair nightclub and who is one of UKIP’s biggest donors, had also bankrolled the campaign of Tory MP Michael Gove, government chief whip.

Another major former Tory donor, Growth Financial Services, switched to UKIP in 2014, giving the party £90,000 before switching back to fund the re-election campaigns of two prominent Tory MPs, Amber Rudd and Mark Field, who sits on the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee.

Similarly, hedge fund millionaire Crispin Odey donated to UKIP in 2014, but in late March 2015 provided funds to support the re-election of Tory MP and climate denier Jacob Rees-Mogg.
“

In other words, a number of major Tory donors plugged into the heart of the Conservative Party establishment were funding both UKIP and Tory political opponents.

Days before the elections, Tory-UKIP funder Robin Birley told pro-Tory newspaper The Telegraph that UKIP supporters should strategically vote Conservative in seats that UKIP could not win — which was most of them. In seats that Tories were unlikely to win, he urged Tory supporters to vote UKIP.

This Tory-UKIP switch strategy, he said, would “stop Britain being left with a government being formed by a hard left rabble of parties.”

Ironically, Birley’s recommendations for UKIP supporters to vote tactically for the Tories were vehemently opposed by Nigel Farage, the very leader of the party he had funded.

But the idea of a Tory-UKIP strategic voting bloc had also been endorsed just days before Birley’s announcement by the Bow Group, the oldest conservative think-tank in Britain.

Chaired by Ben Harris-Quinney, who has worked on foreign policy issues for the Conservative Party in the UK and EU parliaments, the Bow Group includes on its board of patrons several senior Tory figures, such as Lord Norman Lamont, Lord Michael Heseltine, Lord Michael Howard, and Lord Earl Howe — who as of 2010 was appointed by David Cameron as Department of Health minister.
MI5 and The Bow Group

The Bow Group’s Conservative Party patrons had all served in senior Cabinet positions, under either Margaret Thatcher or John Major. All four of them made a point of publicly distancing themselves from their chairman’s exhortations to vote UKIP, which were published by The Telegraph.

But also on the board of patrons is renowned philosopher, Prof. Roger Scruton, who has been connected to dubious anti-left intelligence information operations. Unlike his colleagues in the Tory party, Scruton was silent throughout this affair.

In the 1980s, Scruton was a member of the neoconservative Hillgate Group, a network of British academics who coordinated various policy publications to influence government. Their focus was hyping up the threat of Marxist, leftwing or “radical” infiltration of British universities and schools. Scruton admitted to historian David Callaghan, however, that the Group’s policy reports were “quietly encouraged by 10 Downing Street to concoct an outside pressure group to influence policy.”

Scruton’s Hillgate Group was run by Baroness Caroline Cox, another senior Conservative Party figure with a history of political agitation on behalf of British intelligence. In 1977, Cox was part of a study group behind a report on how leftwing “radical minorities” were subverting “capitalist, free market civilisation.” The report was published by the Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC), a “think tank” created jointly by the British and American intelligence services, specifically the CIA, an MI5-MI6 linked intelligence unit in the Cabinet Office, and the Foreign Office.

The Bow Group’s role in promoting the Tory-UKIP voting strategy was therefore not a curious aberration. Rather, it reflected a strategy being explored by senior elements in the Tory establishment and its elite support-base in the corporate oligarchy.

Scruton’s role in the Bow Group further raises questions about the role of Downing Street and Britain’s intelligence services in the use of UKIP to ramp up pro-Tory votes.

Roger Scruton could not be reached for comment.
MI5 and UKIP

Unbeknown to many, UKIP too had early roots in Britain’s intelligence services.

In 2001, former Conservative Party chairman Norman Tebbit called for an independent inquiry into revelations that UKIP had been infiltrated by MI5. In a televised interview on BBC News, Tebbit said:
“

“A chap came to me and said UKIP had been infiltrated by the British intelligence services and then he gave me two names of people and from various ways I came to the conclusion that I was absolutely and completely certain that these people — although they had left the service and the Foreign Office some years earlier — in fact had been intelligence agents.”

As Tebbit explained in a Spectator article that even Douglas Murray recently endorsed, he “half-heartedly” made his “own inquiries” after a source inside UKIP raised the concerns with him, “and unexpectedly struck gold… I am perfectly sure that the individuals had been active agents, although both would claim to have retired some years ago.”

Tebbit had not suggested that UKIP’s leadership was aware of the intelligence operation. At the time, Nigel Farage admitted that he could not discount Tebbit’s allegations.

It eventually turned out that the two people identified by Tebbit — Heather Conyngham and Christopher Skeate — had indeed been former MI6 officers, who had worked together at one time in Latin America. They were also both senior figures in the now defunct Referendum Party, Skeate as a candidate in 1997.

Robin Birley, the major Tory-UKIP donor who had urged a Tory-UKIP mutual tactical voting strategy, was at that time operations director of the Referendum Party, a Eurosceptic party similar to UKIP. Both Conyngham and Skeate had transferred their allegiance to UKIP after the death of Referendum Party founder, Sir James Goldsmith (Birley’s stepfather).

Birley and his Referendum Party also had a wider relationship to Latin America, specifically Chile. In 1998, Birley had recruited Referendum’s communications director, Patrick Robertson, to work with his campaign group, ‘Chilean Supporters Abroad,’ in support of notorious dictator Chilean General Pinochet, who had been supported by Margaret Thatcher herself.

The late Pinochet had been installed in a brutal military coup in 1973, which had been planned and backed by the CIA and MI6 since the democratic elections that brought leftwing nationalist President Salvador Allende to power in 1970. Birley’s ‘Chilean Supporters Abroad’ published a pro-Pinochet pamphlet that promulgated a range of MI6 and CIA disinformation about Allende.

Senior Tory pro-Pinochet apologists Norman Lamont and Michael Howard are today senior patrons of the Bow Group.

It later transpired that Tebbit’s original informant was then UKIP press officer Chris Jones, who months earlier had written a formal letter to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Tribunal about his “allegation, based on detailed circumstantional [sic] evidence gathered over 5 months that UKIP has been penetrated and is largely controlled by British Intelligence agents.”

The letter requested that the Tribunal:
“

“… call upon files on UKIP: myself: Dr R AE North: G Franklyn-Ryan: Nigel Farage MEP: Heather Coyningham a former FCO official; Christopher Skeate also FCO: Tony Stone: Mark Daniel (alias): Janet Girsman and G Lance Watkins.”

The curious overlap of MI5-MI6 officers with the Referendum, UKIP and Tory parties, and the movement of donors between all three parties, raises questions about the manipulation of the popular vote by a nexus of powerful British interests encompassing a network of corporate elites and Whitehall officials.
MI5 and SNP

The Tory-UKIP nexus is not the only instance offering disturbing evidence of the interference of British intelligence in our national elections.

Last month, The Telegraph  — which had also promoted the Tory-UKIP strategy put out by the Bow Group and Robin Birley — published an ‘exclusive’ about a leaked FCO memo, which purportedly recorded Scottish National Party (SNP) leader Nicola Sturgeon telling the French Ambassador she would prefer a Tory government.

But as former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan and longtime Foreign Office (FCO) official, Craig Murray, remarked about the alleged memo, “both sides of the alleged conversation categorically deny it was said. Nicola Sturgeon denies she said it and the French Embassy deny she said it.”

Supposedly, the confidential contents of Sturgeon’s meeting with the French Ambassador had been passed to the Foreign Office and transcribed by a Whitehall official as a matter of FCO protocol.

“The extraordinary thing is, this is just a lie,” said Murray.
“

“As someone who worked in the FCO for over twenty years and was an Ambassador myself, I can assure you there is absolutely no protocol requirement on the French Ambassador to give the FCO the content of the meetings she, her Consul-General or anybody else from the French Embassy held in Edinburgh. That claim is absolute nonsense.”

Even more bizarrely, it turned out that the Foreign Office itself denied being the source of the alleged ‘leaked memo.’

Drawing on the example of the MI6-forged Zinoviev letter ‘leaked’ to the Daily Mail in 1924, which triggered the fall of the Labour government, Murray concluded: “The fake FCO memo has MI5 written all over it. This is the worst example of British security services influencing an election campaign since the Zinoviev letter.”

“I have been warning the SNP that we are going to be the target of active subversion by the UK and US security services. We are seen as a danger to the British state and thus a legitimate target,” the former Ambassador added.
“

“That the attempt to destabilise Nicola Sturgeon originates with the UK government and the
Telegraph
should give everyone pause. It is very obviously a security service effort. How otherwise is an account which the French Embassy says is completely false, contained in an official memo to be leaked? This episode raises very serious questions. But they are not questions about Nicola Sturgeon. They are questions about the subversion of democracy by the security services, and the willing complicity of the corporate media.”

There is thus alarming evidence that not just Big Money, but Big Brother, made a concerted effort to disrupt the SNP and co-opt UKIP, as a mechanism to sideline what Birnley characterised as a “hard left rabble of parties,” cementing a Tory parliamentary majority.

The next five years promises more of what we have already seen over the last five years: austerity, corporate empowerment, privatisation of public services widening inequality, continued obfuscation on climate change, subservience to Big Oil and nuclear lobbies, and a return of the snoopers’ charter — previously blocked by the Lib Dems — that would enshrine excessively intrusive surveillance powers into law.

So we should make no mistake. This is not a victory for British democracy. It is a victory for Britain’s increasingly draconian corporate-security complex.

Dr Nafeez Ahmed is an investigative journalist, bestselling author and international security scholar. A former Guardian writer, he writes the ‘System Shift’ column for VICE’s Motherboard, and is also a columnist for Middle East Eye. He is the winner of a 2015 Project Censored Award, known as the ‘Alternative Pulitzer Prize’, for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for his Guardian work, and was selected in the Evening Standard’s ‘Power 1,000’ most globally influential Londoners.

Nafeez has also written for The Independent, Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Scotsman, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, Quartz, Prospect, New Statesman, Le Monde diplomatique, New Internationalist, Counterpunch, Truthout, among others. He is the author of A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilization: And How to Save It (2010), and the scifi thriller novel ZERO POINT, among other books. His work on the root causes and covert operations linked to international terrorism officially contributed to the 9/11 Commission and the 7/7 Coroner’s Inquest.

This exclusive is being released for free in the public interest, and was enabled by crowdfunding. I’d like to thank my amazing community of patrons for their support, which gave me the opportunity to work on this in-depth investigation. If you appreciated this story, please support independent, investigative journalism for the global commons via Patreon.com, where you can donate as much or as little as you like.

Source: Nafeez Ahmed, Medium, 8 May 2015

[TonyGosling]

Bristol rejects Tory election victory: Wonderful spread of opinion: recorded @ Weds' Bristol Against Austerity march

Link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNPydJVyP6s

[insidejob]

Tory election chief Lynton Crosby has an aid who was accused of vote fraud when he worked in the US.

http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/

[scienceplease 2]

http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/uk-general-election-results.htm l

[insidejob]

Examination of the UK election is taking place.

One examination shows no evidence of late swing voters, no evidence of ‘Shy Tories’ and evidence of problems with the postal vote:

'...a small proportion of people said they had already voted by post before most of the ballot papers had even been sent out, in areas where there were not any local elections this May there was still a chunk of people who reported having voted in their local elections. At the moment, these people who look as if they might be lying disproportionately break to Labour, so would explain some of the error'.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

Eric Pickles to investigate any undermining of democracy due to postal votes:

[scienceplease 2]

A throw away on the piggate scandal live update is this gem about the election

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/sep/22/george-osbor nes-today-interview-politics-live

My bold...

[insidejob]

https://www.politicshome.com/party-politics/articles/story/eric-pickle s-investigate-electoral-fraud
Eric Pickles to investigate electoral fraud

...The former communities secretary took up his new role after being sacked from the Cabinet by David Cameron following the general election.
He said “corruption in the electoral system” was one of the things he hoped to explore since it “undermines democracy”.
He said an unnamed chief executive had recently told him of being “quite amazed to find that on polling day itself 5,000 postal votes were handed in”.
Speaking to Radio 4’s World at One Sir Eric argued the account “raises eyebrows at the very least”.
He said postal voting was something he wanted to have a “long, hard” look at.
Sir Eric also insisted it was “fair to say” that the recent case of electoral fraud in Tower Hamlets was “an extreme example of what’s happened but it wouldn’t be isolated”...

[John O'Donnell]

I question the result of the Scottish referendum. I have been told that exit polls were banned during the referendum for the first time in recent history. Can anyone confirm this?

[TonyGosling]

I know exit polls did not take place in the Scottish referendum.
I don't know whether they were banned or not.
If they were that's quite a story - when combined with this...

Eric Pickles has been sent in to cover up fraud - obviously to most of us here!

“Within Whitehall as a minister, I found a complete reluctance by officials to take action on the warnings from local councillors and journalists of systematic corruption in the mayoral administration in Tower Hamlets. I would argue that state officialdom is in denial over the real state of electoral fraud in 21st-century Britain. The new Conservative government is no longer prepared to turn a blind eye to Britain’s modern-day rotten boroughs.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/13/uk-election-fraud-whit ehall-in-denial-says-eric-pickles
The coalition government already reformed the voting system by abolishing the old household system of registration and asking people to sign up individually in a move that was aimed at eliminating fraud.

During his investigation, Pickles will seek evidence from the Electoral Commission, the Law Commission, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service, those involved in running elections, and academics with an interest in the field. His remit is to examine what steps are necessary to stop voter registration fraud and error, postal voting fraud, impersonation, intimidation, bribery, treating and undue influence.

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Simon's View
4 out of 5 dentists recommend this WordPress.com site
https://simongah.wordpress.com/2015/09/26/did-fraud-hand-an-election-m ajority-to-the-conservative-look-at-the-facts/
https://politicsthisweek.wordpress.com/2015/09/25/politics-show-with-t ony-gosling-27/

Did fraud hand an #election majority to the #Conservative? Look at the facts
The 2015 General Election result was a shock. But we know that the Conservatives won because of ‘Shy Tories’, ‘late swing voters’, Milliband was too Left-wing and a vote in England against the SNP, don’t we? And your feelings tell you election fraud in the UK is a ridiculous idea, doesn’t it? But, then look at the facts.

Voter fraud cases have gone to court. In April 2015 a court removed Lutfur Rahman from the elected position of Tower Hamlet Mayor after he was found guilty of corrupt practices in the election. The judgment included fraudulent use of the postal vote.

Fraud in local elections are not rare, as the news website, Get Surrey shows:

Woking Borough Council postal vote election fraud trial begins.
13 APR 2015, BY GUY MARTIN
Relatives of Liberal Democrat candidate who won seat on council by 16 votes are standing trial accused of conspiracy to defraud.
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/woking-borough-council-pos tal-vote-9035336

What about national elections? This is what the political website, Politics Homes says

Eric Pickles to investigate electoral fraud
…corruption in the electoral system was one of the things he hoped to explore since it ‘undermines democracy’.
He said an unnamed chief executive had recently told him of being ‘quite amazed to find that on polling day itself 5,000 postal votes were handed in’.
Speaking to Radio 4’s World at One Sir Eric argued the account ‘raises eyebrows at the very least’.
He said postal voting was something he wanted to have a ‘long, hard’ look at.
Sir Eric also insisted it was ‘fair to say’ that the recent case of electoral fraud in Tower Hamlets was ‘an extreme example of what’s happened but it wouldn’t be isolated?
http://www.politicshome.com/party-politics/articles/story/ericpickles- investigate-electoral-fraud

So, what is the evidence about the General Election?

An examination would show that the Conservatives won the election on the basis of postal votes in marginal constituencies. According to the British Election Study 2015, the vote for the Labour Party went up by 3.6% and they won 15 seats whereas the Conservative vote went up by 1.4% – they gained 21 seats.

The real puzzle is what happened to the Lib Dem vote. Many expected disaster for the Lib Dems because they let many of their voters down by backing a Conservative coalition government. Many expected wholesale desertion to Labour and minority parties. What happened? Where Labour could have won, Lib Dems voted Conservative and where Lib Dems could have beat the Tories won, Lib Dems voted Labour. This is what gave Conservatives a majority.

According to the British Election Study:

…That is to say, it was Labour’s vote gains that helped to deprive Labour of an overall majority or largest party status. There was a tactical unwind that cost the Liberal Democrats seats but delivered those seats to the Conservatives.

The question of why former Lib-Dem voters shifted allegiance to the Conservatives in cases where they could have voted for and elected a Labour MP is more puzzling. Among 2010 Lib-Dem voters in our sample, 7 per cent were former Tories and 25 per cent were former Labour voters. There should have been a much greater potential Lib-Dem-to-Labour switch than Lib-Dem-to-Conservative (at least if we look at the campaign). We need to better understand what motivated these voters….’
http://bit.ly/1F84rRn

What is actually being said is that where Lib Dem voters could have helped Labour defeat the Tories, they voted Tory. And where they could have helped the Lib Dem beat the Tories, they voted Tory. So, basically Lib Dem voters rewarded the Conservatives for their handling of the economy with the Lib Dems and punished the Lib Dems for keeping the Tories in power. Does that make sense?

So, what evidence is there that the postal vote in the marginals won it? What did Labour Uncut say?

Revealed: Ed’s night-time dash to casa Brand driven by postal ballot panic
by Atul Hatwal
Uncut has learned the real reason for Ed Miliband’s sudden night-time visit to Russell Brand?s Shoreditch home: panic caused by the early tallies of postal ballots being fed back to party HQ, from marginals around the country.
Labour is behind and urgently needs to reach out to new voter groups. Russell Brand was a means to that end.
Postal voting started in mid-April. Over 5 million are expected to cast their ballot in this way and over the last week, local teams from all parties have attended postal vote opening sessions in each constituency.’
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/05/02/revealed-eds-nighttime-dash-to-ca sa-brand-driven-by-postal-ballot-panic/

So, marginals won it for the Conservatives and the postal vote was important in the marginals. What was the situation in the marginals during the run up to the election: Labour was ahead. The Spectator asked Tory funder and pollster, Lord Ashcroft.

Poll of key marginal seats finds swing towards Labour
17 March 2015 Sebastian Payne
Lord Ashcroft has polled eight key constituencies, of which seven are currently held by Conservatives and one by Labour that he visited six months ago to see who is winning. In these seats, Ashcroft has found there is currently a five per cent swing away from the Conservatives.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/03/poll-of-key-marginal- seats-finds-swing-towards-labour/

Lord Ashcroft admitted that Labour Party was ahead of the Tories in campaigning in the marginals.

Is there a problem with the Tory ground war in the marginals? And if so, how big is it?
By Mark Wallace
Lord Ashcroft’s latest batch of polling in Lab/Con marginals included an interesting note on how the campaigns are being carried out:
‘Most people said they had had literature, direct mail, phone calls or visits from both main parties, but Labour have the edge in these local campaigns on the basis of this evidence. More than 70 per cent had heard from Labour in half the seats polled.’
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/04/is-there-a-proble m-with-the-tory-ground-war-in-the-marginals-and-if-so-how-big-is-it.ht ml

So, in the run up to the elections Labour was ahead in the marginals and had a better campaign than the Tories. But the Tories won. How was that? Well, let’s look at some news stories about the election.

Postal ballot forms for a marginal goes missing:

General Election 2015: Investigation into reports of ‘missing’ Wirral postal vote forms
6 MAY 2015, by Liam Murphy
Wirral council confirms they have reissued postal ballot papers to several addresses in heswall
An investigation is to be launched into reports of missing postal vote papers in Wirral.
The local authority has confirmed it has had more than three dozen requests for ballot papers to be re-issued in the closely fought Wirral South marginal seat – but insists the papers had been sent out.
Wirral South is one of the marginal seats which could decide the General Election – Labour held the seat with a majority of just 531 back in 2010.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/general-election-20 15-investigation-reports-9195178

Concerns over ballot rigging after last-minute flood of postal votes
A last-minute deluge of postal votes allegedly sparked concerns about ballot rigging at Milton Keynes Council.
Instead of the anticipated four or five ballot boxes, 18 brimming boxes containing more than 4,600 votes turned up at the council offices yesterday.
http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/local/concerns-over-ballot-rigging- after-last-minute-flood-of-postal-votes-1-6730869

General Election 2015: City Council ballot papers blunder forces Stoke South recount
By Claire__Smyth May 08, 2015
A RECOUNT is taking place for the Stoke-on-Trent South seat – because of a ballot papers blunder by the city council.
Ukip’s Tariq Mahmood today branded the count an ‘absolute shambles’ after misplaced ballot boxes were found downstairs at the Kings Hall when the counting of the votes upstairs was nearly complete.
And more votes – sent via post – were discovered when the ballot boxes were being verified.
http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/General-Election-2015-Vote-recounts-ord ered-Stoke/story-26463974-detail/story.html

The best one is this in marginal Aberdeen: (I left the computer I used to work out how many anti-SNP postal votes to create. Opps!)

General Election 2015: TABLET COMPUTER found in ballot box at Aberdeen count
8 May 2015 by Andrew Clark
With ballot boxes being emptied and votes being counted across the country, a rather odd discovery has been made in a ballot box at the Aberdeen City count.
While sifting through the paper votes one vote counter found a computer tablet hidden in the ballot box.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/572911/general-elect ion-2015-tablet-computer-found/

But surely, it was the ‘Shy Tories’ etc. So, what of the investigations into voters, what are they saying? This is what UK Polling says investigations have not revealed either Shy Tories or Late Swing voters:

Firstly, late swing – the BES data finds virtually no net change at all between how people said they would vote pre-election and how they reported having voted after the election. The BES team conclude from this that late swing is unlikely. We’ve now got published re-contact data from the British Election Study, ICM, Opinium, Populus and Survation, only Survation found any obvious evidence of late swing in their re-contact survey.
Secondly, Shy Tories. This is essentially the most difficult potential cause to evidence – if people lie before the election, and lie after the election and we can’t check their actual ballot papers, how do you detect it? You need to look for circumstantial evidence. The BES team have compared levels of Tory support in their polling in different types of area, on the assumption that if people feeling embarrassed to admit voting Tory really was a problem it would be less of an issue in heavily Tory areas than in areas where no one else voted Tory. They did not find this pattern.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9460

The British Election Study states:

…The first is the ‘SNP threat’. As discussed above, we currently find little robust evidence that attitudes towards the SNP and expectations about a hung parliament resulted in gains for the Conservatives from Ukip or in vote losses for Labour from former Lib Dems.
The second red herring is Labour’s left/right position that is, the question of whether Labour was either overly or insufficiently left-wing. Generally, our data shows that people were more likely to vote Labour in 2015 when they thought the party was more left-wing, and less likely to vote Labour when they thought it was centrist.
This suggests there is very little to the argument that Labour was too left-wing to attract voters. At the same time there is not much to support the argument that Labour was not left-wing enough. There was very little difference in the likelihood of voting Labour between someone who thought Labour sat at the left-most end of the scale (0) and someone who saw it as just left of centre (4) it is only when people saw Labour as sitting to the right of this point that support really drops off..
http://bit.ly/1F84rRn

Shy Tories, Late Swing Voters, Anti-SNP voters, anti-Left Labour voters are a cover story to explain to the public the result of something else – vote fraud.

I would also put into that category the BBC Exit Poll. This poll was the first to get people to think the election result would be very different to what they had imagined. And there results were very different to what is usually found. A national swing vote disappeared and was replaced with a regional swing vote. So, the North went Labour, we were told, and the South went Tory. Yet, even the exit poll was wrong. It failed to predict a Conservative majority. How did they pick swing voters if there were none? How did they take into account postal voters? There is something not right here.

So, what is the evidence around postal votes? Research found that postal voters lied about their votes to the detriment of Labour.

The UK Polling Report, when exploring whether people mislead the polls on their voting intentions, found evidence of postal vote fraud. there was low turnout did lie about their voting intentions:

‘…a small proportion of people said they had already voted by post before most of the ballot papers had even been sent out, in areas where there were not any local elections this May there was still a chunk of people who reported having voted in their local elections. At the moment, these people who look as if they might be lying disproportionately break to Labour, so would explain some of the error’.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9460

So, there you have it! The accurate exit poll could not have been accurate. No Shy Tories. No late swing. No anti-SNP vote. No anti-Left-wing Labour vote. But there was voter fraud.

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

How low Tories go: Here's the full list of Cameron's 21 broken promises since the May general election @coldhardtruth http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-reveals-21-broken-promises -6537411

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Idiots guide to vote fraud: Six ways to fixi British elections with Simon Hinds

Link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bN9qR_UI_YY

[TonyGosling]

MONDAY 08 FEBRUARY 2016 UK
Conservatives overspent on three 2014 by-elections
http://www.channel4.com/news/conservatives-appear-to-have-overspent-on -three-by-elections

Channel 4 News has obtained evidence of tens of thousands of pounds of spending by the Conservatives during key by-election campaigns which appear not to have been declared.

Hundreds of pages of receipts obtained by this programme seem to show undeclared expenditure by the party in three crucial parliamentary by-election campaigns in 2014.

The documents appear to reveal a pattern of undisclosed spending and link directly to Conservative HQ and senior figures within the party.

Campaign spending in each by-election is subject to a legal limit of £100,000 to ensure fairness, so contests are not skewed in favour of richer political parties.

If all the receipts had been declared, the party would appear to have flouted spending limits in all three by-elections in Newark, Clacton, and Rochester & Strood during 2014.

All three by-elections were seen as crucial battles to halt the then-growing popularity of UKIP, which was increasingly threatening to steal support from the Tories.

Our investigation obtained copies of receipts for six hotels across the three by-election areas showing stays by large numbers of Conservative campaign workers, including senior party figures.

In all, the hotel bills show 1,401 nights of accommodation, with the total cost of rooms, food, and additional spending amounting to £113,030.63 across the three campaigns.

Of this 1,182 nights with costs of £94,112.19 fell within strict campaigning time limits, known as regulated periods, where spending must be declared by law.

This includes £56,866.75 undeclared hotel bills in Rochester, which would have taken them £53,659.83 over the £100,000 spending limit; £26,786.14 in Clacton, which would take them £10,835.36 over the limit; and £10,459.30 in Newark, which would mean a £6,650.28 overspend.

Under the name "Mr Conservatives"
In each of the three by-election campaigns, we found the same pattern with two hotels booked for Conservative campaign workers -- one upmarket for senior staff, and one budget Premier Inn for more junior campaign members.

Receipts for the all of the six hotels do not appear to have been declared in the material submitted to the Electoral Commission.

The vast majority of these hotel stays - 734 in the regulated periods - were booked under the home address of Marion Little, a senior staffer at Conservative Central Office awarded an OBE in this year's New Year's Honours List for her work during the campaigns.

Some rooms were booked under the name "Mr Conservatives".

Mr Conservatives
Senior Conservative Party figures from the Tories' "Ground War Team", also feature among the bookings including Stephen Gilbert, who was then political secretary to Prime Minister David Cameron, and Simon Glasson, now adviser to Chancellor George Osborne. Stephen Gilbert has since been elevated to the House of Lords following the General election.

Lengthy room stays were booked for specialist senior campaign staff, including the then by-election co-ordinator Richard Piper-Griffiths, and then deputy head of press Richard Holden.

Some of the rooms were paid for from the Conservatives' Premier Inn business account, but Channel 4 News understands that others were paid for in person by Marion Little, in installments.

The scale of the army of campaign workers on the ground - peaking at 42 rooms booked on one night - also call into question staffing costs declared by the party.

If staff were working on the by-election campaigns then the associated costs including all hotel stays and salaries should have been declared.

Any party expenditure for campaigning during the strict time limits, known as the regulated period, should be declared to returning officers by law.

Channel 4 News has also found that at least two campaign centres were also not declared; while the precise costs involved in renting these venues is unknown, it could mean thousands more in campaign spending does not appear on the books.

Rochester & Strood By-election
election2
The Channel 4 News investigation uncovered £72,594.82 in bills at two hotels in Rochester & Strood, of which £56,866.75 fell within the by-election regulated period.

This contest was the last before the General Election, and triggered when sitting MP Mark Reckless defected from the Conservative Party to UKIP.

In response, the Tories threw their weight behind young candidate Kelly Tolhurst.

The largest apparently undeclared receipt obtained by Channel 4 News was in Rochester & Strood, at the four-star Bridgewood Manor hotel in Chatham, Kent.

The receipt includes 19 pages of accommodation costs along with food, drinks, tips, and conference room and equipment hire, totaling £50,228.15.

Five other receipts for the hotel add up to £963.01 - making a total £51,191.16 bill.

Of this, 446 nights' stay and £38,112.83 fell within the regulated period of 24 October 2014 to 20 November 2014, and should have been declared.

At the peak, on the night of the vote, the Conservatives had 25 rooms booked in the hotel, housing members of their "Ground War Team".

It included by-election co-ordinator Richard Piper-Griffiths, and deputy head of press Richard Holden who stayed for 36 nights, including 28 in the regulated period.

Prime Minister David Cameron's then political secretary Stephen Gilbert stayed for one night on 23 October, the day before the regulated period began.

The Conservatives also booked rooms at the Rochester Premier Inn with receipts showing 226 nights in the regulated period, totalling £18,753.92 in accommodation and other costs.

All of the rooms were registered using Marion Little's home address.

Spending returns signed by candidate Kelly Tolhurst, who is now the MP, and her election agent Julian Walden, declare they spent £96,793.08 of the £100,000 campaigning limit.

However, the declaration includes no receipts for hotel stays.

Our investigation also calls into question the amount that was declared for staff costs, which should reflect the salaries of the Conservative workers and was valued at £23,724.

Our findings show a total of 672 hotel nights for workers within the regulated period. If each one represents a day's work, it would work out as a day rate of £35.30, or £4.41 an hour.

Channel 4 News has also found that two Conservative campaign centres in Rochester were not declared, including one in an expensive retail mall.

The centre, Unit 67/68 of the Dockside Outlet Centre, consisted of 3,100 square feet of space in the busy shopping mall on St Mary's Island next to the River Medway.

A quote obtained by Channel 4 News shows the cost including rent, rates, service charge and marketing cost would have been approximately £67,052 per year.

For the 28 days of the regulated period, this would work out as £5,143.71, not including any additional expenses such as utilities and telephone costs.

There is no receipt for the unit in Ms Tolhurst's spending return.

The campaign also used an office on the High Street, Rochester where rent, rates, and phone receipts for the campaigning period would amount to £1,387.91.

Again, no receipt was declared.

It means the full value of undeclared expenditure in Rochester could be even higher.

The Rochester by-election was held on 20 November 2014 with Mark Reckless retaining the seat, which he then lost to Ms Tolhurst in the May 2015 general election.

election4
Clacton By-election
Channel 4 News has uncovered £26,786.14 of undeclared hotel spending in Clacton.

The by-election was triggered when the sitting Conservative MP Douglas Carswell defected to UKIP becoming the party's first MP amid a political furore.

In retaliation, the Conservative Party waged a huge effort to unseat him on 9 October, with the party machinery called on to promote candidate Giles Watling.

Our investigation found the Tories booked 290 rooms at the luxurious Lifehouse Spa and Hotel, near picturesque Frinton-on-Sea, of which 258 fall in the regulated period from 12 September to 9 October 2014.

At a conservative estimate of £80 a room, it equates to a bill of £20,640.

Again, all of the rooms were booked using Marion Little's home address.

The list of Conservatives staying at the Lifehouse Spa & Hotel include members of the party's "Ground War Team", with George Osborne's special advisor Simon Glasson staying for 28 nights in the regulated period, elections co-ordinator Richard Piper-Griffiths staying for 23 nights, and deputy head of press Richard Holden for 20.

Prime Minister David Cameron's press secretary stayed for the night of the vote, on 9 October.

The party also reserved 71 rooms at the Clacton Premier Inn, of which 68 fall inside the regulated period, with total bills of £6,146.14.

Spending returns signed by candidate Giles Watling and his election agent Victoria Goff declare they spent £84,049.22 of the £100,000 campaigning limit.

However, they make no mention of any hotel receipts, and if the hotel costs were added in the spending would appear to exceed the limits by £10,835.36.

Ms Goff was among those named on room reservations at the Lifehouse Spa & Hotel, with 32 nights booked in her name, of which 28 fall inside the regulated period.

election3
Newark by-election
Channel 4 News found an estimated £10,459.30 of undeclared hotel bills in Newark, where suspicions were raised about Tory overspending on the night of the vote, on 5 June 2014.

The election was called after the resignation of Conservative MP Patrick Mercer, and saw the party's replacement candidate Robert Jenrick elected.

But after the count, UKIP leader Nigel Farage questioned whether the Conservative campaign had kept within the strict £100,000 spending limit.

He said: "It is difficult to believe, given the number of paid, professional people from the Conservative Party here... their returns are going to come in below the figure."

Our investigation uncovered undeclared receipts showing the Conservative Party booked 63 rooms at Kelham House Country Manor Hotel, with 59 falling in the regulated period, from 2 May to 5 June 2014.

The total spend at the hotel in the period came to £4,209.30.

Of the 59 rooms booked during the regulated period, 57 were booked under Marion Little's home address, with the hotel housing senior members of the "Ground War Team".

It included Simon Glasson, now Special Adviser to George Osborne, who stayed for 12 nights during the regulated period, the then deputy head of press Richard Holden, who stayed for four nights in the period, and election co-ordinator Richard Piper-Griffiths, for one night.

Prime Minister David Cameron's political secretary Stephen Gilbert stayed for a total of five nights in the regulated period, including four nights in the run up to the vote, and one night on 21 May, where he enjoyed a three course meal including Devon crab brulee and a bottle of Escondido Malbec.

election1
The party also booked 125 nights at the Premier Inn Newark, all in the regulated period, and all under the home address of Marion Little.

At an estimated cost of £50 per room, the bill comes to £6,250.

Again rooms were booked under the names of the Conservatives senior "Ground War Team", including 18 nights for deputy head of press Richard Holden, 18 nights for election coordinator Richard Piper-Griffiths, and three nights for Simon Glasson.

Spending returns signed by Robert Jenrick and his election agent Stuart Wallace declare they spent £96,190.98 of the £100,000 campaigning limit.

Again no hotels were included in the declarations.

The total of £10,459.30 undeclared receipts would take them over the limit.

Channel 4 News has approached all individual candidates and agents for comment, as well as the Conservative Party.

In a statement a party spokesperson said: "All by-election spending has been correctly recorded in accordance with the law."

A spokesman for the Electoral Commission said:

"We have been made aware of the allegations of spending breaches at three parliamentary by-elections. Alleged breaches of the rules around candidate spending at by-elections or parliamentary general elections are matters for the police to investigate under the Representation of the People Act 1983.

"The Electoral Commission only has powers to consider possible breaches of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act at general elections, which is the legislation we regulate. We will be considering whether any of the allegations made tonight also come within the Commission's remit or are strictly matters for the police to investigate.

"In 2013, prior to the last General Election, the Electoral Commission recommended that we should be provided with investigative powers and sanctions for offences relating to candidate spending and donations at specified elections. We have not had responses from either the previous or the current Government to this recommendation."

Investigation by Paul McNamara and Guy Basnett.

[TonyGosling]

Conservatives alleged election overspend: the full documents
http://www.channel4.com/news/conservatives-alleged-election-overspend- the-full-documents

Notts Police ask to see records of Tory by-election expenses declaration & returns following our investigation into undisclosed spending across three by-elections and a key General Election marginal.

Evidence obtained by Channel 4 News appears to show that the Conservatives racked up tens of thousands of pounds in undisclosed spending across three by-elections in 2014.

With each by-election there is a strict regulated period - as candidates can only spend up to £100,000 in the run-up to the contest - in order to ensure that larger or richer parties cannot get an unfair advantage.


The apparent over-spends occurred in three contests where the Conservatives waged a fierce campaign against UKIP - in Newark, where MP Patrick Mercer stepped down and the seat was held by the Tories, and Clacton and Rochester, where the sitting Conservative MPs defected and kept the seats for their new party.

In each constituency there was a similar pattern - where senior staff from the party were booked into a more upmarket hotel and more junior staff into a Premier Inn in the area. Channel 4 News has obtained receipts, reproduced in full below, which provide evidence of spending which does not appear to have been declared by the party.

In response to this programme's allegations, a Conservative Party spokesperson said: "All by-election spending has been correctly recorded in accordance with the law."
Channel 4 News has also obtained receipts from the General Election in 2015 - and found that staff were staying in the Premier Inn in the constituency of Thanet North with the spending allocated to the national campaign.


This is despite the fact that neighbouring Thanet South - a fiercely fought local campaign to prevent Nigel Farage from becoming an MP - was the only marginal seat in the general vicinity (the seat in the north of the town has been held by the party since 1983).

In response to this programme's allegations, a Conservative Party spokesperson has repeatedly stated: "All by-election spending has been correctly recorded in accordance with the law."

However Channel 4 News has submitted 10 new questions to the Conservative Party requesting more detail and clarity surrounding this matter.

If you have any concerns about election campaigning in your area then please contact us on electionexpenses@itn.co.uk
Kelham House Country Manor
Newark - Kelham House Country Manor
Click here to download the full receipts obtained by Channel 4 News for party staff who stayed at the Kelham House Country Manor.

News
Newark - Premier Inn
Click here to download the full receipts for the Premier Inn.

News
Clacton- Lifehouse Spa
Click here to download the full receipts for those who lodged at the Lifehouse Spa

News
Clacton - Premier Inn
Click here to download the full receipts for the Premier Inn

News
Rochester - Bridgewood Manor
Click here to download the full receipts for party workers staying at the Bridgewood Manor

News
Rochester - Premier Inn
Click here to download the full receipts for the Premier Inn.

News
Thanet South
Click here to download the full receipts obtained by Channel 4 News for the Premier Inn in Margate, in the Thanet North constituency, which borders on the location of one of the bitterest battles of the General Election campaign.

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Hey! Nice :'(
Dictatorship
Tories above the law in Newark too
No charges despite clear evidence of election fraud http://dailym.ai/1Qp8i1e


Nottinghamshire Police today ruled out a prosecution over Newark poll
Tories faced claims they failed to declare £10,000 in hotel room charges
The total would have taken the party £6,600 over £100,000 campaign limit
But charges could only have been made until July 2015 under election law
For more of the latest Tory Party news visit www.dailymail.co.uk/tories
Nottinghamshire Police will not be taking any action over claims of overspending by the Conservative Party at the Newark by-election.

Chris Eyre, the chief constable of Nottinghamshire Police, said it was too late to bring any prosecutions for alleged election expenses offences relating to the Newark poll, which took place on June 5 2014.

The allegations emerged in a Channel 4 investigation based on hundreds of pages of receipts which suggested the party broke electoral rules in the 2014 contests in Newark, Clacton and Rochester and Strood.

The Tories threw huge resources into winning the Newark byelection in June 2014, including a joint visit by David Cameron and Boris Johnson, pictured +4
The Tories threw huge resources into winning the Newark byelection in June 2014, including a joint visit by David Cameron and Boris Johnson, pictured
But in a letter to police and crime commissioner Paddy Tipping, Mr Eyre said there was a 12-month statutory limit in prosecutions brought under the Representation of the People Act, the law which governs elections.

As the financial return for the poll was made on July 4 2014 the limit has passed, he said.

He added: 'From the information available no prosecution can be brought in this case.'

Campaign spending in by-elections is limited to £100,000 for each party.

Channel 4 News said it had uncovered undeclared hotel bills totalling £10,459.30 in Newark, which would mean a £6,650.28 overspend if added to other campaign costs.

Conservative candidate Robert Jenrick won the Newark by-election with 7,403 more votes than nearest rival Roger Helmer, for Ukip.

It emerged yesterday the Conservative Party would face an electoral commission investigation into its election spending in the battle to defeat Nigel Farage in South Thanet.

MORE...
After his marathon EU talks stall David Cameron is forced to CANCEL tonight's historic Cabinet meeting that was supposed to start the referendum campaign
Former Cameron chief launches a social media drive to draft Boris Johnson as leader of the Out campaign
The Electoral Commission confirmed it would look into Tory spending following an investigation by Channel 4 News.

The Conservatives declared hotel bills costing thousands of pounds as 'national spending' meaning they were not counted against the spending limits of their winning candidate Craig Mackinlay.

The Electoral Commission announced today it will look into whether the £14,000 bill should have counted within strict 'candidate spending' - sending Mr Mackinlay far over tight limits.

Kent Police, which is responsible for investigation breaches of the law relating to candidate spending, has announced it will not pursue a probe into the claims.

The Electoral Commission said today: 'The Commission reminded Kent Police that the ability to investigate these allegations will end one year on from the May 2015 UK Parliamentary General Election.

'Unless the police apply to the Courts for an extension, which they are entitled to do under the Representation of the People Act (RPA), they will have missed the opportunity to investigate any allegations.

The campaign successfully saw Robert Jenrick elected as a Conservative MP but the Tories have since faced allegations they failed to properly declare some hotel expenses +4
The campaign successfully saw Robert Jenrick elected as a Conservative MP but the Tories have since faced allegations they failed to properly declare some hotel expenses
'Anyone found guilty of an offence under the RPA 1983 relating to candidate spending or the making of a false declaration in relation to candidate spending, could face imprisonment of up to one year, and or an unlimited fine.'

Turning to its own investigation, the Commission added: 'The investigation opened by the Commission today focuses on whether the Conservative Party met their reporting obligations under the Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act (PPERA) 2000.'

It will examine 'whether the spending reported by the party in its 2015 UK Parliamentary General Election (UKPGE) campaign spending return, in relation to the Royal Harbour Hotel Ramsgate, was not national campaign spending and therefore should not have been included in the party's return.

The Commission will also study 'whether spending on the Premier Inn Margate was national campaign spending and therefore should have been included in the party's 2015 UKPGE campaign spending return'.

Channel 4 claimed the Tories included a bill for £14,000 at the Royal Harbour Hotel in Ramsgate in their national expenses submission.

It means that the bill, submitted to the Electoral Commission, is not deducted from local campaign spending limits for the party fighting such a key constituency.

These are the latest in a series of allegations that the party breached guidelines for campaign spending, after it emerged that thousands more in receipts were not declared in by-elections.

Hundreds of receipts allegedly show the party failed to declare thousands of pounds in hotel bills, which suggests the party broke the £100,000 spending limit for each of three crucial by-elections.

Ukip leader Mr Farage told Channel 4 after the broadcaster revealed its claims that he would not make a formal police complaint for fear of looking like a 'whinger'.

But he said: 'I have no doubt that what happened in that Thanet constituency was in complete breach with electoral law.'

The Conservative Party has insisted it had declared all of its spending properly in all of the disputed campaigns.

A spokeswoman said: 'All spending has been correctly recorded in accordance with the law.'

The Tories were accused of breaking spending limits in Rochester, where senior party staff, including David Cameron, pictured with candidate Kelly Tolhurst, made regular visits to the constituency in a bid to beat Ukip +4
The Tories were accused of breaking spending limits in Rochester, where senior party staff, including David Cameron, pictured with candidate Kelly Tolhurst, made regular visits to the constituency in a bid to beat Ukip

[TonyGosling]

Gerrymandering
Boundary changes
The maths which show the Tories are stitching up the result of the next election
16:59, 24 FEB 2016 OPINION Jason Beattie BY JASONBEATTIE
The new boundary changes amount to a threat to our democracy
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maths-show-tories-stitching-up-74 33159
There were two sets of figures released today and both should ring alarm bells for anyone who cares about democracy.
The first came from the Office for National Statistics and showed the number of people on the electoral register had fallen from 45,325,100 in 2014 to 44,722,000 last year .
The second came from the Boundary Commission immediately afterwards and revealed its proposals to cut the number of Parliamentary seats in England from 533 to 501.
These are dry numbers but between them they amount to a political stitch up that makes Tammany Hall look like a kindergarten operation.
The main loser is the validity of our democracy but the main casualty is the Labour Party.
David Cameron was elected on a manifesto pledge to cut the number of MPs from 650 to 600.
This was, we were told, part of his drive to cut the cost of politics.
Though opponents have noted his frugality does not apply to either the House of Lords which he is packing with Tory cronies and donors , nor the bill for special advisers.
There are arguments for having fewer MPs.
Other legislatures around the world operate successfully with smaller chambers - Japan has a lower house of 480 representatives, France has 577 members of the National Assembly and the world’s largest democracy India has 545 in its House of the People.
This reform, though painful for MPs, might have been acceptable if were done fairly.
But it is being done in away that causes maximum damage to Labour and minimum harm to the Conservatives.
Changes to the way people register to vote mean the electoral register has fallen by 603,000, with the majority of those missing young, black and minority ethnic and poor.
All these groups are, generally but not exclusively, more likely to back Labour.
Some have estimated the figure missing from the electoral roll is much higher than 603,000 - possibly as many as 1.8million.
In London the population has increased from 8,107,073 in 2010 to 8,656,629 in 2015 but the number of registered voters has fallen from 5,876,329 at the end of 2013 to 5,645,254 as of December 2015.
Yet the Boundary Commission for England, bound by laws enacted by this Government, are having to use the ONS figure as the basis for its proposals.
It is recommending the number of MPs in London is cut from 73 to 68, Yorkshire and Humber will go from 54 to 50 MPs, the North East 29 to 25 and the North West 75 to 68.
The Eastern region will lost just one MP, going from 58 to 57, the East Midlands loses two as it goes from 46 to 44, the South East 83 to 81, South West 55 to 53 and the West Midlands from 59 to 53.
Anyone familiar with the electoral map can see at a glance that predominantly Labour areas are losing disproportionately more MPs while regions which are predominantly Tory are losing fewer.
There is only one Labour MP in the South West region and one in the Eastern region which are losing just three MPs between them, while there are 28 Labour MPs in the North East which is losing four MPs.
So much for the Northern Powerhouse.
The Boundary Commission says the new constituencies must be no smaller than 71,031 and no more than 78,507.
But in the Eastern region, where Labour has just one MP, the seats will have an average electorate of 74,425, while in Labour-dominated London they will be an average of 75,277.
In other words, you are likely to need fewer votes to win a Tory seat than a Labour one.
In the South East the Tories are also set to gain by the Government insisting the Isle of Wight, currently held by a single Tory MP, is split into two seats even though the island has an electorate of 105,448.
That’s an extra Conservative seat for free at the 2020 general election.
By itself this is national scandal but it is part of a wider Conservative operation to neuter its opponents that includes cutting funding for opposition parties, starving Labour of union donations and muzzling charities from speaking out .
The ultimate irony is those Tory MPs fretting about the surrendering of powers to Brussels are complicit in a much greater threat to our democracy.

[TonyGosling]

Tory MPs 'broke election laws' by failing to declare battle bus spending to win marginal seats
22:00, 29 FEB 2016 BY NICK SOMMERLAD
The Conservatives’ RoadTrip battlebus helped 24 to victory but none declared it in their campaign budget, a Mirror probe has found
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-mps-broke-election-laws-7467 576

Two dozen Tory MPs failed to declare thousands of pounds spent on their winning election campaigns in marginal seats, a Mirror investigation has found.

None of the 24 Conservative candidates whose constituencies were visited by the controversial RoadTrip battlebuses included the cost within their election budget locally.

And 20 of them could have breached strict campaign spending limits had they declared it.

Breaching these limits is a criminal offence and could lead to calls for by-elections.

The Tories deny the costs should have been declared as part of local campaigns.

But Labour MP John Mann insisted it should have been declared.

He said: “The RoadTrip costs should be part of the local spend.

"It was explicit support to promote a particular candidate. There were costs and expenses such as the travel being provided.

“That’s unquestionably an election expense for the candidate being promoted and they need to account for it.

"It’s a matter for police and I’d expect there to be challenges to the results in those constituencies.”

PAConservative candidate Craig Mackinlay receives his declaration results for the South Thanet Constituency at the Winter Gardens in Margate, KentConservative candidate Craig Mackinlay
We have estimated the daily cost of each battlebus at more than £2,000 per constituency.

We found 20 of the seats visited were within £2,000 of strict spending limits – meaning the budget would have been broken had the RoadTrip cost been included.

The Tories formed a Government with a majority of 12 seats after outspending Labour by £3million in the general election last May.

The Conservatives spent £15.5million on their campaign, to Labour’s £12million. Losing six MPs would oust the Prime Minister.

UKIP leader Nigel Farage lost in the Kent seat of South Thanet to Tory Craig Mackinlay, who got two visits by RoadTrip during the “short campaign” accompanied Tory chairmen Andrew Feldman and Grant Shapps.

He spent within £178.61 of his limit but declared no transport, hotel or food costs despite two visits.

On the eve of the election, Mr Mackinlay – who is already being investigated over undeclared hotel bills – tweeted: “Thanks for your help @RoadTrip2015 – it’s making a huge difference!”

@CMackinlay/TwitterCraig Mackinlay MP and the Conservative Battle Bus
Mr Farage said: “The Conservative Party spend is already being investigated and these extraordinary revelations will add fat to the fire.

“It seems pretty clear the RoadTrip was intrinsic to many campaigns, the Thanet South campaign included.

"Maybe they were having so much fun that they accidentally forgot basic electoral law.”

Read more: Tories face claims election spending not declared

Election law expert Prof Anthony King , a former member of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, told the Mirror: “It all seems pretty fishy.

"It sounds very plausible that this spending should have been declared by the individual candidates.

“I hope, if people complain, that the local police forces will take their complaints seriously.”

The RoadTrip campaign is already being investigated by the Conservative disciplinary board following allegations of sexual harassment and bullying by organiser Mark Clarke who has been kicked out of the party.

He denies the claims.

London News PicturesPrime Minister David Cameron speaks to farmers during a tour of Harry Johnston dairy farm in Ahoghill, County AntrimUnder fire: Prime Minister David Cameron
During the final 39 days of the election – known as the “short campaign” – candidates must not breach a local spending cap calculated according to the size of the electorate and whether it is a rural or urban seat.

The Mirror examined the local spending returns for 24 constituencies where RoadTrip visited during the “short campaign”. None accounted for the cost.

Of these, 10 candidates were within £1,000 of their spending limit and 20 within £2,000.

Breaching spending limits is a criminal offence under the Representation of the People Act.

It carries a maximum penalty of one year in jail for the MP and election agent or an unlimited fine.

The Electoral Commission said: “If any relevant costs associated with volunteers campaigning specifically for a particular candidate were incurred, we’d expect those costs would be reported as part of the candidate’s spending return.

"Anyone found guilty of an offence relating to candidate spending or the making of a false declaration in relation to candidate spending could face imprisonment of up to one year, and or an unlimited fine.”

CLICK TO PLAY

Play
0:00
/
1:57
Fullscreen
Mute
A petition to overturn an election result must “normally” be presented within 21 days of the election but “further time may be allowed” if there are claims of “an illegal practice relating to election spending”, a spokeswoman said.

But the Commission added: “We’d usually consider a national bus tour paid for and authorised by a political party to constitute party campaign spending where it is intended to promote electoral success for the party by the election of candidates standing in the name of that party.”

The Tories denied breaching rules. A spokesman said: “Election expense returns for the 2015 election were completed and returned by election agents in accordance with the law.

"CCHQ campaigned across the country for the return of a Conservative Government. Such campaigning would be part of the national return, not local return.”

Eleven Tory MPs released a personal version of the statement.

Five Tory RoadTrip battlebuses crossed the country to help handpicked candidates in the final stages of last year’s election campaign, with head office picking up the tab.

The total cost of this campaign has never been published, but the Mirror has found invoices indicating it was more than £2,000 a day, including pay and expenses for volunteers and promotion costs.

One receipt for two buses in the South West and Midlands showed each cost £400 a day to hire. Another was for £429.06 spent on “battle bus marketing” for a vehicle in Taunton.

Tory activist India Brummitt invoiced the party £1,060 a day for her time over 10 days.

Volunteering activists were asked to pay up to £10 a day for joining.

But an online advert placed by Ms Brummitt said: “We will meet ALL the remaining hotel costs and ALL the food costs and provide FREE transport to the Battlebus2015 hotel from London.”

It is unknown how much went on hotels, but invoices to the Electoral Commission show the party paid Premier Inn £55,091 in April alone.

We estimated if the 50 volunteers on each bus shared a £50 twin room and the party spent just £10 a day feeding them, a day’s campaigning would cost £1,750.

Adding £400 for the bus would bring the total to £2,150.

GettyJames Heappey, MP for WellsJames Heappey
Wells
James Heappey beat Liberal Democrat Tessa Munt by 7,585 votes.
Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat) 18,662 32.8%

Spending limit: £16,092.51

Declared: £14,575.64

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £633.13

Response: "My election expense return for the 2015 election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law.

"It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign. I signed the necessary declaration on that basis.

"I am aware that CCHQ campaigned across the UK for the return of a Conservative Government, including in seats such as mine.

"Such campaigning would be part of the national return not within our local return.”


GettyMichelle Donelan, MP for ChippenhamMichelle Donelan
Chippenham
Michelle Donelan beat Liberal Democrat John Hames by 10,076 votes.

Spending limit: £15,236.61
Declared: £14,333.73

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,247.12

Did not respond to a request to comment.


Busy day campaigning in Melksham to turn the Chippenham constituency blue #battlebus2015 @alexHpaterson @MrMarkClarke pic.twitter.com/iwWGLNebLk

— Team Donelan MP (@teamdonelan) April 11, 2015
@michael_ellis1/TwitterMichael Ellis, MP for Northampton NorthMichael Ellis
Northampton North
Michael Ellis beat Labour's Sally Keeble by 3245 votes.

Spending limit: £12,248.64
Declared: £11,418.70

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,320.06

Response: "My election expense return for the 2015 election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law.

"It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign. I signed the necessary declaration on that basis.

"I am aware that CCHQ campaigned across the UK for the return of a Conservative Government, including in seats such as mine.

"Such campaigning would be part of the national return, not within our local return."


@scottmannmp/TwitterScott Mann, MP for North CornwallScott Mann
North Cornwall
Scott Mann beat Liberal Democrat Dan Rogerson by 6,621 votes.

Spending limit: £14,732.43
Declared: £14,476.55
Not declared: hotels, food. Did declare hire of a separate local "battlebus"

Total estimated overspend: £1,894.12

Did not respond to a request to comment.



PhotoshotGraham Evans, MP for Weaver ValeGraham Evans
Weaver Vale
Graham Evans beat Labour's Julia Tickridge by 806 votes.

Spending limit: £14,856.63

Declared: £13,720.32

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,013.69

Response: "My election expense return for the 2015 election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law.

"It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign. I signed the necessary declaration on that basis.

"I am aware that CCHQ campaigned across the UK for the return of a Conservative Government, including in seats such as mine.

"Such campaigning would be part of the national return not within our local return."


Mark Spencer, MP for SherwoodMark Spencer
Sherwood
Mark Spencer beat Labour's Léonie Mathers by 4647 votes.

Spending limit: £15,187.20
Declared: £12,760.00

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated underspend: £277.20

Did not respond to a request to comment.



Read more: Tories face claims election spending not declared

Luke Hall, MP for Thornbury and YateLuke Hall
Thornbury and Yate
Luke Hall beat Liberal Democrat Steve Webb by 1495 votes.

Spending Limit: £14,709.21
Declared: £13,128.08

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £568.87

Did not respond to a request to comment.



jamesberrymp.comJames Berry, MP for Kingston and SurbitonJames Berry
Kingston
James Berry beat Liberal Democrat Ed Davey by 2834 votes.

Spending limit: £13,660.32
Declared: £12,296.37

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £786.05

Response: "My election expense return for the 2015 election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law.

"It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign. I signed the necessary declaration on that basis."


Evening GazetteAnna Soubry, MP for BroxtoweAnna Soubry
Broxtowe
Anna Soubry beat Labour's Nick Palmer by 4287 votes.
Conservative gain

Spending limit: £15,000.09
Declared: £14,106.96

Not declared: bus, hotels, food, except for £140 paid to Beeston Conservative Club for “refreshments for Team 2015 activists”

Total estimated overspend: £1,256.87

Response: "My election expense return for the 2015 General Election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law.

"It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign. I signed the necessary declaration on that basis.

"I am aware that CCHQ campaigned across the UK for the return of a Conservative Government, including in seats such as mine.

"Such campaigning would be part of the national return and not within my local return."


PhotoshotNigel Mills, MP for Amber ValleyNigel Mills
Amber valley
Nigel Mills beat Labour's Kevin Gillott by 4205 votes

Spending limit: £14955.09
Declared: £13881.62

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,076.53

Did not respond to a request to comment.



PhotoshotDavid Morris, MP for Morecambe and LunesdaleDavid Morris
Morecambe and Lunesdale
David Morris beat Labour's Amina Lone by 4,590 votes.

Spending limit: £14,626.23
Declared: £14,118.09

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,641.86

Did not respond to a request to comment.



GettyMarcus Fysh, MP for YeovilMarcus Fysh
Yeovil
Marcus Fysh beat Liberal Democrat David Laws by 5313 votes.

Spending limit: £16,242.54

Declared: £14,870.73

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £778.19

Response: "My election expense return for the 2015 election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law.

"It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign. I signed the necessary declaration on that basis.

"I am aware that CCHQ campaigned across the UK for the return of a Conservative Government, including in seats such as mine.

"Such campaigning would be part of the national return not within our local return."


PhotoshotStuart Andrew, MP for PudseyStuart Andrew
Pudsey
Stuart Andrew beat Jamie Hanley by 4,501 votes.

Spending limit: £12,823.38
Declared: £12,314.60

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,641.22

Did not respond to a request to comment.



PhotoshotOliver Colvile, MP for Plymouth Sutton and DevonportOliver Colvile
Plymouth Sutton and Devonport
Oliver Colvile beat Labour's Luke Pollardby 523 votes.

Spending limit: £12,846.18

Declared: £8,769.37

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated underspend: £1,926.81

Did not respond to a request to comment.



Emma Lee/BMPMaggie Throup, MP for ErewashMaggie Throup
Erewash
Maggie Throup beat Labour's Catherine Atkinson by 3584 votes.

Spending limit: £15265.32
Declared: £12234.25

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated underspend: £881.07

Response: “My election expense return for the 2015 election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law. It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign. I signed the necessary declaration on that basis.

“I am aware that CCHQ campaigned across the UK for the return of a Conservative Government, including in seats such as mine. Such campaigning would be part of the national return not within our local return.”


PhotoshotKarl McCartney, MP for LincolnKarl McCartney
Lincoln
Karl McCartney beat Labour's Lucy Rigby by 1,443 votes.

Spending limit: £13,136.28

Declared: £12,628.68

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,642.40

Response: "My election expense return for the 2015 General Election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law.

"It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign. I signed the necessary declaration as the Candidate on that basis.

"I am aware that CCHQ campaigned across the UK for the return of a Conservative Government, including in various seats such as mine.

"Such campaigning would be part of the national election expense return and as such not within our local (General Election or local government) expense return."


PhotoshotKevin Foster, MP for TorbayKevin Foster
Torbay
Kevin Foster beat Liberal Democrat Adrian Sanders by 3,286 votes.

Spending limit: £13,217.88
Declared: £12,193.42

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,125.54

Did not respond to a request to comment.



GettyCraig Mackinlay, MP for Thanet SouthCraig Mackinlay
South Thanet
Craig Mackinlay beat UKIP's Nigel Farage by 2,812 votes.

Spending limit: £15,016.38
Declared: £14,837.77

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,971.39

Did not respond to a request to comment.



GettyMarcus Jones, MP for NuneatonMarcus Jones
Nuneaton
Marcus Jones beat Labour's Vicky Fowler by 4,882 votes.

Spending limit: £14,768.88
Declared: £13,435.51

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £816.63

Did not respond to a request to comment.



amandamilling.comAmanda Milling, MP for Cannock ChaseAmanda Milling
Cannock Chase
Amanda Milling beat Labour's Janos Toth by 4,923 votes.

Spending limit: £15,355.23
Declared: £14,465.95

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,260.72

Did not respond to a request to comment.



alexchalk.comAlex Chalk, MP for CheltenhamAlex Chalk
Cheltenham
Alex Chalk beat Liberal Democrat Martin Horwood by 6,516 votes.

Spending limit: £13,229.34
Declared: £12,576.45
Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,497.11


Did not respond to a request to comment.



westmidlandsconservatives.comMike Wood, MP for Dudley SouthMike Wood
Dudley South
Mike Wood beat Labour's Natasha Millward by 4,270 votes.

Spending limit: £12,295.68
Declared: £11,452.60

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,306.92

Response: "My election agent prepared and submitted my expense return, which included all expenditure legally authorised by myself and my agent for use in my campaign. I am confident that those returns fulfilled all of our obligations under both the letter and the spirit of the law, and so I signed the candidate's declaration accordingly.

"The Conservative Party, like all parties, campaigned strongly across the country to secure a parliamentary majority, and that campaigning activity is rightly part of the national expenditure return rather than local candidates' returns."


@mp_rt/TwitterPaul Scully, MP for Sutton and CheamPaul Scully
Sutton and Cheam
Paul Scully beat Liberal Democrat Paul Burstow by 3,921 votes.

Spending limit: £12,760.38

Declared: £12,461.20

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated overspend: £1,850.82

Response: "My return for election expenses relating to the 2015 election was completed and returned by my election agent in accordance with the law.

"It included all items authorised by my election agent for use in my campaign and I signed the required declaration on that basis.

"I am aware that Conservative Central Headquarters campaigned across the UK to secure the election of a Conservative Government, including in seats such as mine. Such campaigning would be part of the national return not within our local return."


Manchester Evening NewsDavid Nuttall, MP for Bury NorthDavid Nuttall
Bury North
David Nuttall beat Labour's James Frith by 378 votes.

Spending limit: £12755.40

Declared: £7151.30

Not declared: bus, hotels, food

Total estimated underspend: £3,448.10

Response: "As far as I am aware my election expense return was completed by my election agent in accordance with the law and that it included all items authorised by him for my campaign.

"I signed the declaration relating to the return on that basis.

"CCHQ campaigned on a national basis, including in constituencies such as mine, for the election of a majority Conservative government.

"My understanding is that the costs of this campaigning would be part of the national return and not included on our local return."

[TonyGosling]

About the #Quixote Investigation
http://www.sleazeexpo.wordpress.com

by Wirral In It Together

The #Quixote investigation, followed by the #Quixote Interim Report have taken the best part of 10 months, commencing shortly after the May 2015 UK General Election, and are yet to be completed.

The public will recall that the outcome of this election took most professional polling organisations by surprise. As a direct consequence, these organisations' own forecasting systems were placed under urgent review.

Our investigation has been undertaken in an organised, strictly forensic manner by a number of fully-qualified and politically-neutral professionals.

In the coming days and weeks, dedicated items will be released into the public domain on the www.sleazeexpo.wordpress.com blog, listed and summarised by parliamentary constituency. Their purpose is to indicate to the UK public precisely where suspected fraudulent behaviour occurred in the May 2015 General Election.

This had been seen to involve alleged voterigging on a disturbingly large scale, which had been carried out in a deliberate and calculated manner. The impact of this alleged voterigging had the effect of marginalising all of the UK's smaller political parties and as a result severely impaired their chances of securing winning candidates across large numbers of seats.

This alleged fraudulent conduct occurred across all four home countries of the United Kingdom and was facilitated by the existence of a not fit for purpose Voting Count Model - which remains in use today by the UK Electoral Commission.

With this in mind, #Quixote investigators believe it incumbent upon them to start releasing this information now in order to alert the UK authorities to further potential criminal activity. This is a planned attempt to head off what would be the damaging consequences of fraudulent interference with the conduct of the upcoming May 2016 UK local elections, potentially followed by a voterigged EU referendum on 23rd June 2016.

Wirral In It Together | April 15, 2016 at 8:21 am | Tags: #VotegateUK #Quixote #GE2015 #Voterigging Electoral Commission | Categories: General | URL: http://wp.me/p36YWJ-27z

[TonyGosling]

#TORYELECTIONFRAUD: THE STORY NO ONE WANTS TO TELL
6 MAY , 2016 By Amit Singh - Amit is the co-editor of Consented
http://www.consented.co.uk/read/toryelectionfraud-the-story-no-one-wan ts-to-tell/

#ToryElectionFraud is one story that hasn’t picked up that much in the media. Whilst it did trend on Twitter for one evening this week and John Snow at Channel 4 did an investigation on it in April, there hasn’t been much talk of what the fraud could mean for the Conservative Party’s victory in May of last year.

The Tories are now under investigation regarding their campaign spending in 2015 and are suspected of breaking campaign spending rules in key marginal seats. Cameron’s party has admitted spending tens of thousands of pounds in undeclared expenses in 29 marginal seats. Failure to declare expenditure is illegal and has led to the party being investigated by the Crown Prosecution Services.

Most of this relates to the more than £38,000 spent on Tory party activists as part of the BattleBus2015 strategy to win a select few swing seats from Labour and the Lib Dems in last May’s General Election.

The Tories have a twelve seat majority in the House of Commons so the 29 swing seats they targeted with the Battle Bus had a huge say in the outcome of the election. If the Conservative Party had one just thirteen fewer seats it would have had to have formed a coalition which would have seriously hindered its ability push ahead with its current austerity agenda.

Channel 4 have investigated these allegations of election fraud for some time, showing discrepancies in by-election spending in 2014 in Clacton following the defection of Douglas Carswell, as well as the recent allegations relating to the build up to the 2015 election in which the Tories allegedly failed to declare £26,786.14. The overspending in all areas doesn’t seem outrageously excessive – it’s not millions of pounds being spent – but it paints the picture of a party continually flouting the electoral rules and the rule of law to fight key battle grounds.

Yet all this was grossly under-reported in the press with few people outside of the Twitter sphere really aware of the ins and outs of the scandal. Channel 4 was pretty much the only mainstream media outlet to pick up on the scandal which is particularly galling when you consider the recent attention shown to the problems faced by the Labour Party.

Over the last week or so the press has been hammering Labour for a perceived problem of anti-Semitism, something the party acted swiftly with, suspending the accused with the view to launching an investigation. Politicians from across the spectrum were chiming into this debate and the media ran with it. But this level of scrutiny wasn’t extended to the Conservative Party or their election expenses. Instead there was a near media blackout.


BBC have been particularly vigorous in anti-Corbyn rhetoric since he became the leader of the party. His cabinet reshuffle after the Syria vote was described as a “revenge reshuffle” – whereas the civil war in the Conservative Party was barely reported.

If there was evidence suggesting Corbyn had won the Labour leadership bid under suspicious circumstances it’d be front page news for every British paper but next to nothing is written about the Torries. It’s not like this isn’t a big story. It’s massive and has huge ramifications for British politics.

What does this say about the level of democracy we have in Britain when something like this is not only possible, but isn’t even heavily scrutinized? It speaks volumes of how the press and political classes work in tandem. It is also disappointing to see how opposition politicians aren’t making more of a fuss about it.

The consequences will likely be that a few individual Tory figures will be punished, but the structures that allowed for this corruption will go unchecked. It also shows how money talks in British politics, even if we see it as detached from the sort of corporate politics we see in the USA. The Tories spent the most and thus won the most seats.

In all of the seats where fraud can be proven a new vote should be re contested and the Tories shouldn’t be able to field candidates in these seats. This is of course unlikely as even though it looks like the Tories broke the law, we can’t expect the Government to be held to account. British democracy continuously looks like it’s being flouted and undermined, by both politicians and the press.

[scienceplease 2]

http://www.thecanary.co/2016/05/12/conservatives-try-hiding-informatio n-electoral-fraud-watchdog-bares-teeth/