I still think we are heading for polling disaster inquiry MK II....I just can't believe that a) basically half the nation will vote Tory and b) that Jezza might perform better than Brown or Miliband.
I hope not, another major inquiry would sound the death knell for many a polling firm.
The current state of the parties in London, according to YouGov’s study of 1,040 Londoners, is Labour on 41 per cent, down from their 43 per cent at the 2015 election, and Theresa May’s Conservatives on 36 per cent, up from 34.
I strongly suspect that Labour are hoovering up pointless Green votes in places like Hackney and Islington whilst losing them in more marginal suburban seats.
There's a difference between a politician/hanger-on and someone who is supposed to act independently in a potentially criminal investigation.
What would you think if a judge had made derogatory comments 5 years ago about one of your clients? Would you be happy that their views might have "long ago been abandoned"?
To me it's not her views as such that are a problem, but the competence of someone working in regulatory compliance who posts such things publicly on Facebook has to be questionable.
I guess Theresa May doesn't need to fire the Chief Exec of the CPS now?
EDIT: Karl McCartney MP says she does need to at the Electoral Commission!
“It is clear that those who lead the Electoral Commission who followed and allowed this action to take place are politically-motivated and biased – actions that have rendered this organisation wholly unfit-for-purpose. In these circumstances, the positions of the Executive Team and Senior Management Group – from the Chief Executive down to her side-kick, Louise Edwards, who has spearheaded many, if not all, of these one-sided enquiries – are now untenable and I believe that they should resign forthwith.”
I'm confused. Surely we've just discovered the show was run by a communist Corbynite and yet there are no charges? It's almost as if the entire public sector is not an anti-Tory conspiracy.
"One file, from Kent Police, was only recently received by the CPS, and remains under consideration. No inference as to whether any criminal charge may or may not be authorised in relation to this file should be drawn from this fact and we will announce our decision as soon as possible once we have considered the evidence in this matter."
The current state of the parties in London, according to YouGov’s study of 1,040 Londoners, is Labour on 41 per cent, down from their 43 per cent at the 2015 election, and Theresa May’s Conservatives on 36 per cent, up from 34.
I strongly suspect that Labour are hoovering up pointless Green votes in places like Hackney and Islington whilst losing them in more marginal suburban seats.
Anywhere were a lot of people earn more than £80K is gone in London.
"One file, from Kent Police, was only recently received by the CPS, and remains under consideration. No inference as to whether any criminal charge may or may not be authorised in relation to this file should be drawn from this fact and we will announce our decision as soon as possible once we have considered the evidence in this matter."
I guess the fear for the Tories is that is announced say ohhh like a week before the GE....because isn't the time running out on that one?
The current state of the parties in London, according to YouGov’s study of 1,040 Londoners, is Labour on 41 per cent, down from their 43 per cent at the 2015 election, and Theresa May’s Conservatives on 36 per cent, up from 34.
I strongly suspect that Labour are hoovering up pointless Green votes in places like Hackney and Islington whilst losing them in more marginal suburban seats.
I guess there's about a million odd votes there, plus the associated far left fringes
There's a difference between a politician/hanger-on and someone who is supposed to act independently in a potentially criminal investigation.
What would you think if a judge had made derogatory comments 5 years ago about one of your clients? Would you be happy that their views might have "long ago been abandoned"?
To me it's not her views as such that are a problem, but the competence of someone working in regulatory compliance who posts such things publicly on Facebook has to be questionable.
That's a fair point.
But it seems to me that someone in her role has to be *seen* to be impartial as well as actually being impartial
The decision to bill the expenditure centrally was surely taken at Tory HQ, with the local guys being essentially clueless? At worst they may have asked and perhaps were told not to worry about it by HQ. Tory HQ may have had a lucky escape, other than the fine.
Labour looks set to lose at least four seats in London where the Ukip collapse is boosting the Conservatives, an exclusive Evening Standard analysis of the General Election fight in the capital reveals today.
A new YouGov poll of Londoners reveals Jeremy Corbyn’s party has gone into reverse in his home city since the 2015 election, slipping from a nine-point lead over the Conservatives to a gap of five points.
Our analysis of key seats, based on polling plus intelligence on the ground, suggests five London seats will change hands on June 8 - while another four are on a knife-edge.
He hasn't had a good few years...we had the conspiracy over the Tories doing something dodgy with data in Crewe, we had his backing potty mouth minister which all went a bit squiffy, and now this.
"One file, from Kent Police, was only recently received by the CPS, and remains under consideration. No inference as to whether any criminal charge may or may not be authorised in relation to this file should be drawn from this fact and we will announce our decision as soon as possible once we have considered the evidence in this matter."
I guess the fear for the Tories is that is announced say ohhh like a week before the GE....because isn't the time running out on that one?
I'm confused. Surely we've just discovered the show was run by a communist Corbynite and yet there are no charges? It's almost as if the entire public sector is not an anti-Tory conspiracy.
No, a communist Corbynite took it this far and once an independent organisation got it handed to them it stopped there.
The decision to bill the expenditure centrally was surely taken at Tory HQ, with the local guys being essentially clueless. At worst they may have asked and been told not to worry about it by HQ. Someone centrally should have had been in front of CPS and Tory HQ has had a lucky escape.
The central party (along with other parties) got massive fines from the electoral commission for their own crap accounting at the last election.
So no boost for the LDs then and ironically given the only case left where charges may be brought is Thanet South the only party Crick might have boosted is UKIP who have perhaps been kept on life support as a result of this news
Not remotely surprised, as I said from the time they were mooted. And I say this as someone who had some inside track on what has been going on. These "charges" were a result of very poor journalism from Crick - he did not seem to know that the individuals on the BattleBus were personally paying £50 a day for their accommodation - and some very pathetic attempts by losing candidates to smear their opponents with, frankly, rubbish claims.
They should have been chucked out on day one, but I suppose for the sake of transparency, they had to be looked at, so as not to have possibility of "cover-up" or "favour" being bandied around. But the cost has been massive. I have been told it was £1.5m to investigate one claim alone.
The way this matter has been bandied around for political advantage has been less than edifying. I trust people will now have the decency to let it drop, acknowledging that each of those candidates facing these questions has come out the process with nothing to answer for. Sure, there were failings, but each of the parties has had these - and been fined accordingly.
I'm confused. Surely we've just discovered the show was run by a communist Corbynite and yet there are no charges? It's almost as if the entire public sector is not an anti-Tory conspiracy.
Respect to the CPS for doing this properly, by boring press release, and let us trust they would have done the same if charges were being brought. But many, including me, were appalled by their conduct in relation to the unlovely "Creases" Huhne, and said so. The point is not a partisan one.
Not remotely surprised, as I said from the time they were mooted. And I say this as someone who had some inside track on what has been going on. These "charges" were a result of very poor journalism from Crick - he did not seem to know that the individuals on the BattleBus were personally paying £50 a day for their accommodation - and some very pathetic attempts by losing candidates to smear their opponents with, frankly, rubbish claims.
They should have been chucked out on day one, but I suppose for the sake of transparency, they had to be looked at, so as not to have possibility of "cover-up" or "favour" being bandied around. But the cost has been massive. I have been told it was £1.5m to investigate one claim alone.
The way this matter has been bandied around for political advantage has been less than edifying. I trust people will now have the decency to let it drop, acknowledging that each of those candidates facing these questions has come out the process with nothing to answer for. Sure, there were failings, but each of the parties has had these - and been fined accordingly.
He also made some sweeping generalizations in loads of seats. He basically said here is my guess-estimate of what it would have cost for these people and then if I stick all that bill onto the local spending the Tories overspent.
"One file, from Kent Police, was only recently received by the CPS, and remains under consideration. No inference as to whether any criminal charge may or may not be authorised in relation to this file should be drawn from this fact and we will announce our decision as soon as possible once we have considered the evidence in this matter."
I guess the fear for the Tories is that is announced say ohhh like a week before the GE....because isn't the time running out on that one?
11 June.
Why might explain the timing of the election
I rather suspect it's more that the timing of the election explains the date of the announcement.
Truly remarkable - the CPS believe that the returns were inacurate, the Electoral Commission fines the Tories but now no proceedings on the basis that none of these agents and candidates really know what was going on.
Really. What happened to the notion that ignorance of the law is no defence?
Truly remarkable - the CPS believe that the returns were inacurate, the Electoral Commission fines the Tories but now no proceedings on the basis that none of these agents and candidates really know what was going on.
Really. What happened to the notion that ignorance of the law is no defence?
Truly remarkable - the CPS believe that the returns were inacurate, the Electoral Commission fines the Tories but now no proceedings on the basis that none of these agents and candidates really know what was going on.
Really. What happened to the notion that ignorance of the law is no defence?
As I said, the "intent" was probably at the centre, rather than locally.
The key issue here really is the notion of local vs national spending is virtually impossible to work out in this digital age (and one where moving people around the country is trivial).
The authorities really need to consider how to adjust the rules for the modern age.
The key issue here really is the notion of local vs national spending is virtually impossible to work out in this digital age (and one where moving people around the country is trivial).
The authorities really need to consider how to adjust the rules for the modern age.
I haven't been following the CPS story with any real interest, it all seemed like a bit of a dud, and a bit straw-grasping. I doubt any more than 1 in 50 voters has actually even been aware of this story at all.
I haven't been following the CPS story with any real interest, it all seemed like a bit of a dud, and a bit straw-grasping. I doubt any more than 1 in 50 voters has actually even been aware of this story at all.
C4 news were certainly hyping it up at every opportunity.
Crick having a very bad day. Not only have the CPS declined to prosecute*, but he's getting a slapping from fellow journos over his (seemingly false) claim that the Tories were demanding questions in advance of granting an interview with TM.
* Not that this is a declaration of innocence, or anywhere close to it.
So 14 police forces have the time and manpower to investigate possible technical infringements of electoral law, but are too busy to investigate a major outbreak of violent crime (20 cases a day) by moped gangs in London.
Truly remarkable - the CPS believe that the returns were inacurate, the Electoral Commission fines the Tories but now no proceedings on the basis that none of these agents and candidates really know what was going on.
Really. What happened to the notion that ignorance of the law is no defence?
That is not what the press release says. The standard of evidence for the Electoral Commission is to demonstrate that there was a breach of the regulations, for which they were fined. However, the standard of evidence for a criminal prosecution is much higher - it has to be proven that there was deliberate intent to knowingly breach the regulations.
The press release does not say that the agents and candidates did not know what was going - it says that they believed that these expenses could be allocated centrally, not locally, and so they did not report them. This made the returns "inaccurate" and subject to an EC fine, but there clearly weren't any "hoho, if we pretend we think these are central expenses we can avoid reporting them, bwahahah" emails; so no criminal prosecution.
but this was the reason for the May U-turn wasn't it, she was about to see 30 MPs banged up?
If so, LOL at the unintended consequences: CPS responsible for the beginning of the Thousand Year Reich because, subject to caveats about predictions and counterfactuals, there is no way that a 2020 election would have produced the outcome which this one is going to.
This does bring into question C4's impartiality, and the amount of time and effort they put into this story. Some serious and searching questions have to be asked of a national, subsidised broadcaster.
BBC, Sky, etc, look like they're attending a wake at the moment.
"Perhaps the CPS will decide not to prosecute. The CPS could come to a different view of the facts than the Commission. Or decide that although they think the law was broken that the only charges they can proceed on require proving a dishonest motivation and that won’t be possible. Certainly possible, but by no means certain."
I don't know who Mark Pack is but the quote above shows he did not leave himself out on a limb.
Just a 2% Labour to Conservative swing in a 60:40 Remain stronghold.
My rough and ready model of differential swing from the other day might not be too bad.
It suggests SW London is more positive for the LDs than most of the PB pundits have been predicting.
I don't think that's a safe assumption. Inner city London is exactly where I'd expect to see the Lib Dems increasing their vote share. There are a lot of very disgruntled Remain voters in these parts. Moderate and temperate voters like me often get their ears bent by them.
Truly remarkable - the CPS believe that the returns were inacurate, the Electoral Commission fines the Tories but now no proceedings on the basis that none of these agents and candidates really know what was going on.
Really. What happened to the notion that ignorance of the law is no defence?
That is not what the press release says. The standard of evidence for the Electoral Commission is to demonstrate that there was a breach of the regulations, for which they were fined. However, the standard of evidence for a criminal prosecution is much higher - it has to be proven that there was deliberate intent to knowingly breach the regulations.
The press release does not say that the agents and candidates did not know what was going - it says that they believed that these expenses could be allocated centrally, not locally, and so they did not report them. This made the returns "inaccurate" and subject to an EC fine, but there clearly weren't any "hoho, if we pretend we think these are central expenses we can avoid reporting them, bwahahah" emails; so no criminal prosecution.
Faisal Islam (no fan of the Tories) just said on Sky that he had seen leaked emails where candidates / agents repeatedly asked CCHQ is this local or national spending with CCHQ replying national.
'So 14 police forces have the time and manpower to investigate possible technical infringements of electoral law, but are too busy to investigate a major outbreak of violent crime (20 cases a day) by moped gangs in London.'
Hopefully we get to find out how many police hours were wasted & what this nonsense has cost the taxpayer.
Comments
http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/cps-statement-on-election-expenses/
Big plus for the conservatives
(unless that's your weight).
EDIT: Karl McCartney MP says she does need to at the Electoral Commission!
“It is clear that those who lead the Electoral Commission who followed and allowed this action to take place are politically-motivated and biased – actions that have rendered this organisation wholly unfit-for-purpose. In these circumstances, the positions of the Executive Team and Senior Management Group – from the Chief Executive down to her side-kick, Louise Edwards, who has spearheaded many, if not all, of these one-sided enquiries – are now untenable and I believe that they should resign forthwith.”
Only because it was late, not because charges are expected.
'Corbyn to win by landslide thanks to Tory election fraud'.
But it seems to me that someone in her role has to be *seen* to be impartial as well as actually being impartial
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/05/02/mark-pack-on-the-major-event-that-could-yet-derail-this-election/
A new YouGov poll of Londoners reveals Jeremy Corbyn’s party has gone into reverse in his home city since the 2015 election, slipping from a nine-point lead over the Conservatives to a gap of five points.
Our analysis of key seats, based on polling plus intelligence on the ground, suggests five London seats will change hands on June 8 - while another four are on a knife-edge.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/revealed-labour-to-lose-at-least-four-london-seats-as-party-goes-into-reverse-in-the-capital-a3535221.html
Why might explain the timing of the election
They should have been chucked out on day one, but I suppose for the sake of transparency, they had to be looked at, so as not to have possibility of "cover-up" or "favour" being bandied around. But the cost has been massive. I have been told it was £1.5m to investigate one claim alone.
The way this matter has been bandied around for political advantage has been less than edifying. I trust people will now have the decency to let it drop, acknowledging that each of those candidates facing these questions has come out the process with nothing to answer for. Sure, there were failings, but each of the parties has had these - and been fined accordingly.
So this story turns out to just be crickbait then.
Corbyn will be pulling these in - but they are almost all stuck in ultra-safe, urban Labour seats or ultra-safe, suburban Tory seats.
It's likely to lead to increased inefficiency in the Labour vote.
Really. What happened to the notion that ignorance of the law is no defence?
The authorities really need to consider how to adjust the rules for the modern age.
My rough and ready model of differential swing from the other day might not be too bad.
https://twitter.com/petesaull/status/862245845655322624
http://www.thenational.scot/politics/15239293.Alex_Salmond__May_knew_she_was_going_to_lose_Tory_MPs_to_the_expenses_scandal_____that_s_the_real_reason_we_re_having_an_election/?ref=mrb&lp=11
Given the people around him, he probably thinks it's desperately needed.
Could still be rather awkward. A week before the GE would be rather unhelpful to say the least, taking a leaf out of Comey's book.
* Not that this is a declaration of innocence, or anywhere close to it.
The press release does not say that the agents and candidates did not know what was going - it says that they believed that these expenses could be allocated centrally, not locally, and so they did not report them. This made the returns "inaccurate" and subject to an EC fine, but there clearly weren't any "hoho, if we pretend we think these are central expenses we can avoid reporting them, bwahahah" emails; so no criminal prosecution.
BBC, Sky, etc, look like they're attending a wake at the moment.
I don't know who Mark Pack is but the quote above shows he did not leave himself out on a limb.
'So 14 police forces have the time and manpower to investigate possible technical infringements of electoral law, but are too busy to investigate a major outbreak of violent crime (20 cases a day) by moped gangs in London.'
Hopefully we get to find out how many police hours were wasted & what this nonsense has cost the taxpayer.