Michael Crick, Channel 4 News’s political correspondent, has spent months investigating the Conservative Party’s election expenses from last year’s general election, focussing on the party’s “battle buses”, which moved activists around the country, and the associated costs incurred (e.g. hotels).
Last night’s programme featured another report, this time looking at the use of the buses in the South-West, where the Conservatives successfully targeted every one of the 14 seats held by the Lib Dems:
In response to Crick’s investigation, the Conservatives accepted that they had failed to declare some expenses for hotels due to what they termed an “administrative error”.
Yet the more fundamental question which the Electoral Commission is apparently investigating is whether the costs associated with the battle bus should properly have been accounted for on local rather than national expenses returns. The Tories insist that they should not, but if the Electoral Commission takes a different view it on the face of it could mean that in several constituencies, the Conservatives exceeded spending limits.
The Electoral Commission told Channel 4 News:
The Commission is currently conducting an investigation into the Conservative Party’s 2015 General Election spending return and will consider carefully any new allegations that are raised as part of the Channel 4 News programme.
In line with the Commission’s Enforcement Policy, the Commission does not comment on on-going investigations, as to do so may hinder the conduct of the investigation.
Given the interest of the Lib Dems in the seats under investigation, one hopes the party is paying close attention to, and where necessary assisting, the Electoral Commission’s work.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
How Chancellor Reeves torpedoed the economy
The Disneyfication of Haley Mills
Survation now put Andy Burnham 10 points ahead in Makerfield
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Peter Martin
Chris Cory
Ruth Bright
BigTallTim
Daniel Walker
22 Comments
I reckon that it will be the Election Agents who will carry the can. After the 1997 General Election, Labour’s winning candidate in Newark, Notts., the late Fiona Jones, spent a load more money than she should. It was her Agent, local Councillor, Des Whitcher, who was debarred from standing fir election again. Most of the ‘overspending’ was alleged to have come from excessive telephone canvassing via the local Labour Party. Ms Jones survived; but list her seat to Tory, Richard Alexander, in 1983.
If I had my way, all those seats in question should be subject to By Elections.
@ John Marriott You are right, it is likely to be the agent who carries the can. In the 1979 GE in Chelmsford the Tories (deliberately) failed to declare all their election expenses. The election agent received a three-month suspended prison sentence. The Tory MP (and the Treasurer of the Conservative Association who was an accountant) got away scot-free.
Well that the South West accounted for. Just need an excuse for the other 34 now.
Election fraud never mind clerical error. They are Tories well in to financial accountancy. Yes they should all be open to By Elections. It is quite possible that they deliberately, again, failed to declare the expenses for they definitely wanted the seats They knew it would be a while before it was found out According to the ‘sentences’ that were passed down they thought it was not much of a risk. Equally the electoral commission will not come down on them like a ton of bricks. They get away with dodgy tricks again.
Anyone who fights against the tories knows that they actually don’t give a stuff about limits. I once followed a tory deliverer round and counted the number of houses he delivered his letter to – which tallied exactly up with the postal votes in that walk. When I looked at the expenses the Tories had only declared half the number letters that there should have been for Postal voters. They were fifty quid under but I’m sure they spent thousands more than they declared. Sadly I can’t prove it and it only is revealed when there is a scandal.
The Electoral Commission would take us to the cleaners for this behaviour but will (at worst) give the Tories the merest of slaps on the wrist.
We need the truth, we need elections to be fair, and those breaking the rules to suffer appropriate punitively punished as a deterrent.
Spending limits on campaigns don’t get my heart racing with excitement, but if we have them they should be enforced.
The problem is we have a spending limit on a campaign then what is going to stop individuals and voluntary organisations from adding to a party’s election spend?
It can be done, but not perfectly.
Oh come on, everyone knows that every party does this when it is in their interest to do so, which is why it is only people like Michael Crick who raise the issue – otherwise it is Mutually Assured Destruction. It is only where the law is blatantly flouted, as it appeared to have been in 2010 by one of the current candidates for Mayor of London, that it is worth taking action, and even he got away with a limp slap of the wrist by the feeble Electoral Commission.
This is one can of worms that does not surprise me in the least. The example of Stevenage, which has solidly returned a Labour Council for the last 50 years yet regularly returns a Tory MP, is bizarre. Where do the Tories active supporters come from? They’re in abundance come a general election but no where to be seen at local elections. They no they can’t win at street level, which requires hard work and going door to door.
For 2015, they were able to fund full colour leaflets targeted to individual electors several months of the main campaign.
The whole issue of election expenditure needs tightening. The Electoral Commission needs more staff and possibly regional ones too. One possibility might be for agents to return a budget to the Commission within 7 days of an election being declared and which should be open to public gaze right from the start. Agents’ views please.
Having just been party to an Election Court case which we won, the whole case centred on experienced Labour Councillors signing Town Council nomination forms when they lived outside the ward in question (plus a numpty Tory doing the same thing in the same ward).
We are now waiting to see if the Electoral Commission will take this further as a criminal investigation. But as in the above comments we will never know until something (if anything) happens. But I am not holding my breath.
The Lab/Tory defence was that this was a clerical error, but that doesn’t wash, we believe the Labour people knew what they were doing.
The RO defended his decision to accept the nomination papers as he didn’t regard it his job to be a “detective”!!!! He was suitably told off by the judge in his summing up, ROs are there to check these things are right.
The problem is that this very straight forward case took almost a year to come to court, so any parliamentary case as described by Channel 4 could take ages.
By the way, we now have a triple rerun of the election on 5th May, in Over ward of Winsford TC, any help welcome.
I wonder if there are one or two seats where Liberal Democrat “national” expenditure was directed?
Stephen Booth is absolutely correct, but we have to remember who was responsible for constitutional and electoral reform in the Coalition when these new rules came out. Step forward Mr ‘grown up government’ himself – Nick Clegg!
Now I’m puzzled. Aren’t these the 2000 accounting rules from long before Clegg was in government?
The criminal offence allegations if proven are very serious indeed. They may have determined who governs our country. It strikes at the very heart of democracy. It therefore affects everyone whether or not they reside in one of the constituencies mentioned in the media. If you want to help get this matter investigated a letter along the following lines to your Chief Constable might assist: First one for where there are constituencies within your area affected; the second for where there are none to put pressure on Devon & Cornwall where there are several.
Dear Chief Constable
I would be most grateful if you could tell me whether our constabulary intend to investigate the alleged electoral expenses fraud by candidates and agents within your jurisdiction.
My understanding of election law is that it is a criminal offence to sign off an incorrect election expense return and this should be investigated in all the constituencies that reports in the national and local media have highlighted.
I look forward to hearing that you are taking these most serious allegations that go the heart of our democracy seriously.
Yours faithfully
Dear Chief Constable
I would be most grateful if you could tell me whether your constabulary intend to investigate the alleged electoral expenses fraud by candidates and agents within your jurisdiction.
My understanding of election law is that it is a criminal offence to sign off an incorrect election expense return and this should be investigated in all the constituencies that reports in the national and local media have highlighted.
I look forward to hearing that you are taking these most serious allegations that go the heart of our democracy seriously. They effect everyone regardless of where they live.
Yours faithfully
Jen,
The accounting rules may have been in place before Nick’s period in office, but he missed the chance to sort them out and the changes that went through on his watch made things even easier for them. As a result, and the opportunity to reign in the Conservatives ability to buy an election was completely missed – like most of the constitutional reform Nick promised us. 🙁
I was outraged by this report – as indeed I was outraged when the overspending in four Tory fights against UKIP candidates was reported (I hope others were as well.)
I missed the follow up report which was going to look at seats in the Midlands and the North (presumably Labour seats).
Instead of the opinion pollsters having an Inquiry into their methodology it might have been better if all the non-Tory parties had asked the local constabulary to have an inquiry first.
I have only recently become active again for the party, having been agent for local, parliamentary and Euro elections in the 1970s and 80s. Back then I can recall a returning officer rejecting a nomination paper because we’d used Tipex to hide a mistake; we were forced to go back to all the assentors to re-sign the whole paper. That RO also insisted that all signature were legible. On the plus side I can recall a Euro RO giving me back our deposit at the count the moment our vote past the 12½% mark!
While we want to avoid charges of “sour grapes” it does look as though we should be doing some serious digging in seats that we lost. Adrian Sanders provides useful drafts for letters to chief constables; but I wonder what the PCC will have to say now this is a political position?
crewegwyn 22nd Apr ’16 – 9:23am
I wonder if there are one or two seats where Liberal Democrat “national” expenditure was directed?
An excellent question. Perhaps Sheffield Hallam and Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey?
Whilst the current issue appears to be about hotel expenses for the battlebus, surely the expensive direct mail campaign the Tories ran, focused on their targets, is the more obviously local expenditure? National campaigning activity aimed at getting TV, radio and press coverage is justifiably national, since the coverage could be seen by anyone anywhere, whereas a letter sent to particular individuals at a particular address can only be intended to influence their personal votes in their own particular local constituency.
Why has there been nothing about this in the BBC whilst the press and BBC have given non-stop coverage to Ken Livingstones’ remarks about whether Hitler at one point favoured a Jewish state. I smell a rat here. Has this Anti Semitism row been inflamed to deflect attention from the tory corruption?
I think the police should be allowed to get on with their job. Let’s not politicise this, it’s now a criminal matter.
I don’t understand how you can say “Let’s not politicise this”. If flouting the electoral expenses rules so as to win seats isn’t political, what is?!