UNISON to be fined for failing to declare election expenditure

Yesterday the Electoral Commission published information about the campaign spending by UK political parties during the 2010 general election. Buried near the end of the release was this news:

Two third parties – ‘UNISON – The Public Service Union’ and ‘Searchlight Information Services Ltd’ – failed to submit their spending return on time. The Commission has issued Searchlight Information Services with a fine. The Commission will issue UNISON – The Public Service Union with a fine when they submit their return.

The overall figures showed spending down from its heights of 2005, with 43 parties spending just under £32m for 2010 compared with a total of just over £42m for 2005. The total amount of election-related expenditure was significantly higher as these totals exclude sums declared on individual candidate expense returns and also exclude certain exempt categories, including various party staff salaries.*

The Liberal Democrat figure was £4,787,595, up from £4,324,574 in 2005.

* The introduction of these rules for the 2001 election campaign caused one of my favourite exchanges with the Electoral Commission during my time working for the party, which went something like this: ‘Just to check I’ve understood both the law and your guidance correctly – we have a member of staff here whose job title is General Election Planning Manager. However, their salary does not count towards the General Election expense limit, is that right?’ ‘Yes.’

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in Election law and News.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/22280 for Twitter and emails.

4 Comments

  • Agreed Geoffrey – wonderful voluntary organisations. If only the City had been a quarter as regulated as these bodies.

  • Whatever the rights and wrongs, it is worth knowing – I will be sending a donation to Searchlight. Bryan any city firm acting as a third party in the GE would have been equally regulated.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?




Recent Comments

  • User AvatarDenis Mollison 28th Aug - 11:55am
    Richard - It's the unionist parties that started the threatening, by categorically ruling out a currency union, despite, for example, Alistair Darling being on record...
  • User AvatarDavid Evans 28th Aug - 11:53am
    Martin, the point regarding the pound is very simple - It is perfectly acceptable for the Scots to have the pound and the stability offered...
  • User AvatarRichard Dean 28th Aug - 11:43am
    @Martin. Scotland already has a responsibility to repay a proper proportion of the UK's national debt. So Salmond's "generosity" in offering this is no generosity...
  • User AvatarMartin 28th Aug - 11:39am
    Richard Dean: The threat is on the other (NO) side. Salmond explicitly stated that with a currency agreement he would support taking responsibility for a...
  • User AvatarMatthew Huntbach 28th Aug - 11:24am
    David Allen I don’t think it’s “education, education, education”, I do think it’s “Clegg, Clegg, Clegg”. It’s Clegg, fees, Clegg, NHS, Clegg, bedroom tax, Clegg,...
  • User AvatarRichard Dean 28th Aug - 11:24am
    @T-J That is why it's a political mistake. By threatening me personally with a bill of over £2000 for Scottish independence, Salmond has changed the...