Labours chief Twitterer has seemingly broken electoral law.
Bracknell Blog has the full story.
H/T: Cato.
Showing posts with label Electoral Fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Electoral Fraud. Show all posts
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Criminal Complaints Made In Ireland Over LT2 Vote
Team Europe is saying that a criminal complaint has been lodged in Ireland against the returning officers, Jose Barroso, The European Commission, Brian Cowen and other subsequent persons involved in the Lisbon Treaty campaign.
I reproduce their content from Alan Keenan below:
--
The facts outlined below will prove that the Lisbon Treaty Referendum of 2/10/09 is Null and Void under Irish and European law. I present two separate points that shall subsequently be proven:
I. The Irish Government, alongside the European Commission ran a fraudulent and illegal campaign for the Lisbon Treaty Referendum.
II. Numerous violations of Irish Referendum law and discrepancies that call into question the security and validity of the votes themselves, default the Irish vote to the result of the last Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
1) The intervention of the European Commission, entailing massive expenditure of money to influence Irish opinion towards a Yes, the running of a web-site and the issuing of statements that sought to counter No-side arguments, and the advocacy of a Yes vote by Commission President Barroso and other Commissioners and their staffs during visits to Ireland. This is unlawful under European law, as the Commission has no function in relation to the ratification of new Treaties, something that is exclusively a matter for the Member States under their own constitutional procedures;
2) The part funding of the posters and press advertising of most of Ireland’s Yes-side political parties by their sister parties in the European Parliament, even though it is illegal under Irish law to receive donations from sources outside the country in a referendum and even though, under European law, money provided by the European Parliament to cross-national political parties is supposed to be confined to informational-type material and to avoid partisan advocacy;
3) The Irish Government’s unlawful use of public funds in circulating to voters a postcard with details of the so-called “assurances” of the European Council, followed by a brochure some time later containing a tendentious summary of the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, as well as other material - steps that were in breach of the 1995 Irish Supreme Court judgment in McKenna that it is unconstitutional of the Government to use public funds to seek to obtain a particular result in a referendum;
4) The failure of the country’s statutory Referendum Commission to carry out its function under the Referendum Act that established it of explaining to citizens how the proposed constitutional amendment and its text would affect the Irish Constitution. Instead the Commission’s Chairman, Judge Frank Clarke, turned the Commission into an arm of Government propaganda, while the judge indulged himself in various “solo-runs” on radio and in the newspapers, giving several erroneous explanations of provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, even though this was quite beyond his powers under the Act;
5) Huge expenditure of money by private companies such as Intel and Ryanair to advocate a Yes vote, without any statutory limit, in possible breach of Irish company and tax law, and undoubtedly constituting a major democratic abuse.
6) Breaches by the Irish broadcast media of their obligation under the Broadcasting Acts to be fair to all interests concerned in their coverage of issues of public controversy and debate. Newstalk 106, owned by Mr Denis O’Brien, a committed supporter of the Yes side, was quite shameless in its partisanship on its current affairs programmes.
II.
Under Irish law, ballot boxes are required to be delivered by members of the Gardai to the polling stations at 7:00 am on the date the election takes place.
This legal requirement applies to ALL polling in Ireland, whether elections or referendums.
On this occasion, however, the ballot boxes were delivered to the private residences of the polling/Returning Officers, 48 hours prior to the Referendum.
A number of honest Returning Officers formally objected to this BREACH OF PROCEDURE, and to the concomitant prospective breach of security, let alone of the electoral legislation.
We understand that such objections were officially dismissed out of hand on the spurious and diversionary grounds that the ballot boxes possessed no commercial value, so it would be in nobody’s commercial interest to steal them.
The central issue – that since the Irish ballot boxes were delivered 48 hours early they could be ‘stuffed’ with YES votes by returning officers, as routinely happens in places like the former Soviet Republic of Georgia – was of course not addressed.
The Irish voters were given pencils to make their mark on the ballot, even though all Irish electoral ballots are supposed to be filled with black pen.
Almost nobody was asked for any form of ID or information at the polling stations.
The ballot boxes were left unattended and moved about by many people without question.
At least one box in Cork was removed from the count centre by an unknown individual as shown in the attached picture and video link.
Many foreign nationals and others who were not legally entitled to vote voted in this Referendum. Irish Times article “Gardai to investigate suspected vote fraud”, shows seven voters registered to an empty house.
It follows that, given that the local electoral law was flouted, THE OUTCOME OF THE IRISH REFERENDUM IS FRAUDULENT AND MUST IMMEDIATELY BE DECLARED NULL AND VOID.
--
The post also links to a petition which has been signed by nearly 1,000 people already. If you believe that there are question marks over the conduct of the Irish referendum, and if you agree with some or all of the above then please take one minute to sign THIS PETITION. If you support Lisbon, you should also sign this petition. The Irish vote is the only one which will involve popular consultation, if ratification and implementation across Europe is based on a the tarnished reputation of the Irish vote, Lisbon will never, ever have any legitimacy. All sides need to know if this was a fair and honest vote.
I reproduce their content from Alan Keenan below:
--
The facts outlined below will prove that the Lisbon Treaty Referendum of 2/10/09 is Null and Void under Irish and European law. I present two separate points that shall subsequently be proven:
I. The Irish Government, alongside the European Commission ran a fraudulent and illegal campaign for the Lisbon Treaty Referendum.
II. Numerous violations of Irish Referendum law and discrepancies that call into question the security and validity of the votes themselves, default the Irish vote to the result of the last Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
1) The intervention of the European Commission, entailing massive expenditure of money to influence Irish opinion towards a Yes, the running of a web-site and the issuing of statements that sought to counter No-side arguments, and the advocacy of a Yes vote by Commission President Barroso and other Commissioners and their staffs during visits to Ireland. This is unlawful under European law, as the Commission has no function in relation to the ratification of new Treaties, something that is exclusively a matter for the Member States under their own constitutional procedures;
2) The part funding of the posters and press advertising of most of Ireland’s Yes-side political parties by their sister parties in the European Parliament, even though it is illegal under Irish law to receive donations from sources outside the country in a referendum and even though, under European law, money provided by the European Parliament to cross-national political parties is supposed to be confined to informational-type material and to avoid partisan advocacy;
3) The Irish Government’s unlawful use of public funds in circulating to voters a postcard with details of the so-called “assurances” of the European Council, followed by a brochure some time later containing a tendentious summary of the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, as well as other material - steps that were in breach of the 1995 Irish Supreme Court judgment in McKenna that it is unconstitutional of the Government to use public funds to seek to obtain a particular result in a referendum;
4) The failure of the country’s statutory Referendum Commission to carry out its function under the Referendum Act that established it of explaining to citizens how the proposed constitutional amendment and its text would affect the Irish Constitution. Instead the Commission’s Chairman, Judge Frank Clarke, turned the Commission into an arm of Government propaganda, while the judge indulged himself in various “solo-runs” on radio and in the newspapers, giving several erroneous explanations of provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, even though this was quite beyond his powers under the Act;
5) Huge expenditure of money by private companies such as Intel and Ryanair to advocate a Yes vote, without any statutory limit, in possible breach of Irish company and tax law, and undoubtedly constituting a major democratic abuse.
6) Breaches by the Irish broadcast media of their obligation under the Broadcasting Acts to be fair to all interests concerned in their coverage of issues of public controversy and debate. Newstalk 106, owned by Mr Denis O’Brien, a committed supporter of the Yes side, was quite shameless in its partisanship on its current affairs programmes.
II.
Under Irish law, ballot boxes are required to be delivered by members of the Gardai to the polling stations at 7:00 am on the date the election takes place.
This legal requirement applies to ALL polling in Ireland, whether elections or referendums.
On this occasion, however, the ballot boxes were delivered to the private residences of the polling/Returning Officers, 48 hours prior to the Referendum.
A number of honest Returning Officers formally objected to this BREACH OF PROCEDURE, and to the concomitant prospective breach of security, let alone of the electoral legislation.
We understand that such objections were officially dismissed out of hand on the spurious and diversionary grounds that the ballot boxes possessed no commercial value, so it would be in nobody’s commercial interest to steal them.
The central issue – that since the Irish ballot boxes were delivered 48 hours early they could be ‘stuffed’ with YES votes by returning officers, as routinely happens in places like the former Soviet Republic of Georgia – was of course not addressed.
The Irish voters were given pencils to make their mark on the ballot, even though all Irish electoral ballots are supposed to be filled with black pen.
Almost nobody was asked for any form of ID or information at the polling stations.
The ballot boxes were left unattended and moved about by many people without question.
At least one box in Cork was removed from the count centre by an unknown individual as shown in the attached picture and video link.
Many foreign nationals and others who were not legally entitled to vote voted in this Referendum. Irish Times article “Gardai to investigate suspected vote fraud”, shows seven voters registered to an empty house.
It follows that, given that the local electoral law was flouted, THE OUTCOME OF THE IRISH REFERENDUM IS FRAUDULENT AND MUST IMMEDIATELY BE DECLARED NULL AND VOID.
--
The post also links to a petition which has been signed by nearly 1,000 people already. If you believe that there are question marks over the conduct of the Irish referendum, and if you agree with some or all of the above then please take one minute to sign THIS PETITION. If you support Lisbon, you should also sign this petition. The Irish vote is the only one which will involve popular consultation, if ratification and implementation across Europe is based on a the tarnished reputation of the Irish vote, Lisbon will never, ever have any legitimacy. All sides need to know if this was a fair and honest vote.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Yet Another Fine Mess Gordon
The Attorney General Baroness Scotland has today been fined £5,000 for her employment of an illegal immigrant who overstayed on a student visa by five years.
The fine was for failing to keep copies of documents that The Baroness claims she checked to validate that the worker was legally entitled to work in the UK. No further action from the UK Border Agency or from The Prime Minister will follow.
The law that has been broken was advised upon by the Attorney General during its conception, as the AG acts as lawyer to the Government. In it, specific provisions were worded to ensure that employers keep copies of documents as failure to produce any documentation would not be a defence against the specific law. It is a long held standing in English Law that Ignorance of the law is not a defence against it, and all judges are held to apply this principle. There is no specific need to word such a provision really unless specific onus is required – so entrenched is the notion to law.
As such, to have an Attorney General now who advised and helped frame a law which included a provision that the onus of proof falls to the accused and that only the production of evidence showing pro-forma checks were made (in this case, photocopies of documents) to then fall foul of that law is breathtakingly incompetent for somebody of the Attorney Generals position. It is the Attorney General equivalent of wile e coyote strapping himself to an Acme missile in the pursuit of a blue feathered dinner only to go and blow himself up – Perhaps even more incompetent than that.
The whole situation has all of the hallmarks of a whitewash about it.
I say Whitewash because a £5,000 fine does not begin to resolve this little problem and yet again I think Gordon Brown has staggeringly underestimated the knock on effect this is going to have; yet seems to be a player in getting into the rush to investigation, fine, slap on the wrist, move along now, la la la we don’t care, we’re not listening chain of events that has come to pass in under a week.
I am upset, and I think you are too.
Firstly, The Attorney Generals position is just the latest of high offices in our Kingdom that has been besmirched by the appointment to that office of somebody capable of causing exceptional embarrassment to that post. It is just however the latest in a long line of appointments under this Labour Government; the frequency of scandals seems to have increased two-fold since Gordon Browns coronation. By simply flying off to the US to play World Statesman and by failing to sack Baroness Scotland, Brown has again, for the umpteenth time shown himself to be indecisive and completely unable to provide a Government of any talents, let alone of “all talents”. With crystal clarity the public gaze upon a man who yet again put his own and his party’s perceptions ahead of doing the right thing and acting in the best interests of this country. The moment the fine was issued the Prime Minister should have implemented the change, to which he would have already had lined up – that is what a leader would have done.
Secondly, the hiring of illegal immigrants is a known and frequently used tactic of employers to avoid paying minimum wage to employees. The minimum wage is the crown jewel in 12 years of Labour government, perhaps the only initative left that retains broad popularity and reminds all of us of the promise that we all felt of what was to come. There has been no word however if the Baroness was avoiding paying her worker minimum wage, which would be another offence, both under the law and in terms of holding a grand position within a government, no matter how discredited, to whom not only brought in the legislation for that minimum wage, but have and will rely upon its fair introduction as a campaigning point. Could Labour even mention minimum wage if their own AG was found to have ignored it?
It adds to the feeling over cover up that we are not informed one way or the other; could the Baroness still find herself in an embarrassing position on this?
Thirdly, when will it all end? I seem to repeat myself on this point over and over here on my blog but for every single scandal, even today, Labour follows the same instincts, the same alienating formula of self preservation. Try to change the story, deny, attack others… get found out, try to hold on to high paying, high powered position… blame the Tories, stuff the voters, stuff doing “the right thing”, quick, get Rosa, Kevin and Polly to write about how nice we are and how the Tories will starve your babies to feed their butlers…. Anyone remember what the story was, no? Great, pass the expense forms.
This brings us onto the next point. Brown is trying to draw a line under this, but the Sunday Times has already revealed thatWile e coyote, er sorry, Baroness Scotland, has claimed £170,000 for an allowance paid to Lords who love outside of London, whilst living in Chiswick, which is in, er, London. I am guessing the Baroness did not photocopy those claim forms either before submitting them. Again, ignorance cannot be a defence against fraudulent claims. The Government should either swiftly investigate and publish the relevant paperwork or call the Serious Fraud Squad – which conveniently Baroness Scotland should have the phone number for given that in her role as Attorney General she has supervisory power over it. And of course, nobody bats an eyelid that someone with supervisory powers over the Serious Fraud Squad could be involved in a massive fraud themselves... that is just modern Britain.
Perhaps Gordon Brown could clear up whether he thinks this series of events have come about because the Attorney General is a crook, or because she is grossly incompetent, or is ita bit of both? If he could elaborate on that, whilst explaining why she still has a job I think a lot of people would be much clearer.
With Brown in charge there is no one to push these lunatics over, because he’s one of them. They will cling on, and he will until next year as clearly too many of Labour Parliamentary presence have too much to lose if Brown goes. They are fighting to save each other and their own jobs now. They’re alright, but what about the rest of us who live here?
When Labour polls in the mid twenty percent range I find it hard to believe there are still people in this country that can abide by such loose and questionable behaviour in our governing officials.
If Brown had of sacked the Baroness he would have legitimately got a bump in the polls for doing the right thing, and more than that for being seen to act decisively. This would have sent a warning to rebels ahead of the Conference, and may have wiped away some of the questions about a change of leadership. With a conference platform and feeling bold, Gordon Brown could have used the conference to spell out difference in Labour and Conservative policy and cuts – he could have regained at least some of the agenda and perhaps even put dents in Conservative plans for their conference. He would have acted positive and perhaps got a positive result.
Instead… well, you know the rest.
The fine was for failing to keep copies of documents that The Baroness claims she checked to validate that the worker was legally entitled to work in the UK. No further action from the UK Border Agency or from The Prime Minister will follow.
The law that has been broken was advised upon by the Attorney General during its conception, as the AG acts as lawyer to the Government. In it, specific provisions were worded to ensure that employers keep copies of documents as failure to produce any documentation would not be a defence against the specific law. It is a long held standing in English Law that Ignorance of the law is not a defence against it, and all judges are held to apply this principle. There is no specific need to word such a provision really unless specific onus is required – so entrenched is the notion to law.
As such, to have an Attorney General now who advised and helped frame a law which included a provision that the onus of proof falls to the accused and that only the production of evidence showing pro-forma checks were made (in this case, photocopies of documents) to then fall foul of that law is breathtakingly incompetent for somebody of the Attorney Generals position. It is the Attorney General equivalent of wile e coyote strapping himself to an Acme missile in the pursuit of a blue feathered dinner only to go and blow himself up – Perhaps even more incompetent than that.
The whole situation has all of the hallmarks of a whitewash about it.
I say Whitewash because a £5,000 fine does not begin to resolve this little problem and yet again I think Gordon Brown has staggeringly underestimated the knock on effect this is going to have; yet seems to be a player in getting into the rush to investigation, fine, slap on the wrist, move along now, la la la we don’t care, we’re not listening chain of events that has come to pass in under a week.
I am upset, and I think you are too.
Firstly, The Attorney Generals position is just the latest of high offices in our Kingdom that has been besmirched by the appointment to that office of somebody capable of causing exceptional embarrassment to that post. It is just however the latest in a long line of appointments under this Labour Government; the frequency of scandals seems to have increased two-fold since Gordon Browns coronation. By simply flying off to the US to play World Statesman and by failing to sack Baroness Scotland, Brown has again, for the umpteenth time shown himself to be indecisive and completely unable to provide a Government of any talents, let alone of “all talents”. With crystal clarity the public gaze upon a man who yet again put his own and his party’s perceptions ahead of doing the right thing and acting in the best interests of this country. The moment the fine was issued the Prime Minister should have implemented the change, to which he would have already had lined up – that is what a leader would have done.
Secondly, the hiring of illegal immigrants is a known and frequently used tactic of employers to avoid paying minimum wage to employees. The minimum wage is the crown jewel in 12 years of Labour government, perhaps the only initative left that retains broad popularity and reminds all of us of the promise that we all felt of what was to come. There has been no word however if the Baroness was avoiding paying her worker minimum wage, which would be another offence, both under the law and in terms of holding a grand position within a government, no matter how discredited, to whom not only brought in the legislation for that minimum wage, but have and will rely upon its fair introduction as a campaigning point. Could Labour even mention minimum wage if their own AG was found to have ignored it?
It adds to the feeling over cover up that we are not informed one way or the other; could the Baroness still find herself in an embarrassing position on this?
Thirdly, when will it all end? I seem to repeat myself on this point over and over here on my blog but for every single scandal, even today, Labour follows the same instincts, the same alienating formula of self preservation. Try to change the story, deny, attack others… get found out, try to hold on to high paying, high powered position… blame the Tories, stuff the voters, stuff doing “the right thing”, quick, get Rosa, Kevin and Polly to write about how nice we are and how the Tories will starve your babies to feed their butlers…. Anyone remember what the story was, no? Great, pass the expense forms.
This brings us onto the next point. Brown is trying to draw a line under this, but the Sunday Times has already revealed that
Perhaps Gordon Brown could clear up whether he thinks this series of events have come about because the Attorney General is a crook, or because she is grossly incompetent, or is ita bit of both? If he could elaborate on that, whilst explaining why she still has a job I think a lot of people would be much clearer.
With Brown in charge there is no one to push these lunatics over, because he’s one of them. They will cling on, and he will until next year as clearly too many of Labour Parliamentary presence have too much to lose if Brown goes. They are fighting to save each other and their own jobs now. They’re alright, but what about the rest of us who live here?
When Labour polls in the mid twenty percent range I find it hard to believe there are still people in this country that can abide by such loose and questionable behaviour in our governing officials.
If Brown had of sacked the Baroness he would have legitimately got a bump in the polls for doing the right thing, and more than that for being seen to act decisively. This would have sent a warning to rebels ahead of the Conference, and may have wiped away some of the questions about a change of leadership. With a conference platform and feeling bold, Gordon Brown could have used the conference to spell out difference in Labour and Conservative policy and cuts – he could have regained at least some of the agenda and perhaps even put dents in Conservative plans for their conference. He would have acted positive and perhaps got a positive result.
Instead… well, you know the rest.
Friday, August 28, 2009
A Potential Electoral Fraud Minefield ?
From the Oxford Mail
A SENIOR Oxford City Council official left 200 polling cards in a bag on a wall — and did not tell his bosses when he discovered they were missing.
The error by electoral services manager Martin John was revealed in a council report following June’s county council and European elections, when hundreds of polling cards disappeared.
Last night, the Electoral Commission told the council it must “learn its lesson” and “improve the service for voters” in the city.
The report by Jeremy Thomas, head of legal and democratic services at Oxford City Council, said Mr John, who has been in the role for 12 years, was delivering poll cards in Summertown and Wolvercote when he left the bag on a wall. He was covering for a colleague and had printed 200 extra cards because he thought some were missing for part of Woodstock Road.
But it was only when he was in the area that he realised the cards were not missing at all.
The report, obtained by the Oxford Mail, said: “Unfortunately, Mr John placed the duplicates in a bag on a wall about halfway down Bainton Road to separate them from the original print run which he was delivering and, by an oversight, left them there.
“On finishing the delivery, roughly 45 minutes later, he realised his mistake and went back to the spot where he had left them, but they had gone.”
Abingdon builder Mark Newman, 37, found the cards in a skip in Harpes Road, Sunnymead, three weeks before the county council and European elections on June 4, and handed them to police.
It is bad enough that an error of this nature occurred, it is worse that a supposedly senior official made it and decided not to report it.
However, isn't the real failure here the fact that he just decided to print more cards? Is there no checks in place for this? Can anybody from the council just decide to print electoral cards as they see fit?
He is also the person who delivered the cards, so is it really the case that in England there is no checks nor balances anywhere in the process? If the full responsibility of printing and delivering cards falls to just one person, how can we know when a person is corruptly abusing this system?
Based on this incident it sounds like it would be easy enough to do. I hope the Electoral Commission look at this very closely.
A SENIOR Oxford City Council official left 200 polling cards in a bag on a wall — and did not tell his bosses when he discovered they were missing.
The error by electoral services manager Martin John was revealed in a council report following June’s county council and European elections, when hundreds of polling cards disappeared.
Last night, the Electoral Commission told the council it must “learn its lesson” and “improve the service for voters” in the city.
The report by Jeremy Thomas, head of legal and democratic services at Oxford City Council, said Mr John, who has been in the role for 12 years, was delivering poll cards in Summertown and Wolvercote when he left the bag on a wall. He was covering for a colleague and had printed 200 extra cards because he thought some were missing for part of Woodstock Road.
But it was only when he was in the area that he realised the cards were not missing at all.
The report, obtained by the Oxford Mail, said: “Unfortunately, Mr John placed the duplicates in a bag on a wall about halfway down Bainton Road to separate them from the original print run which he was delivering and, by an oversight, left them there.
“On finishing the delivery, roughly 45 minutes later, he realised his mistake and went back to the spot where he had left them, but they had gone.”
Abingdon builder Mark Newman, 37, found the cards in a skip in Harpes Road, Sunnymead, three weeks before the county council and European elections on June 4, and handed them to police.
It is bad enough that an error of this nature occurred, it is worse that a supposedly senior official made it and decided not to report it.
However, isn't the real failure here the fact that he just decided to print more cards? Is there no checks in place for this? Can anybody from the council just decide to print electoral cards as they see fit?
He is also the person who delivered the cards, so is it really the case that in England there is no checks nor balances anywhere in the process? If the full responsibility of printing and delivering cards falls to just one person, how can we know when a person is corruptly abusing this system?
Based on this incident it sounds like it would be easy enough to do. I hope the Electoral Commission look at this very closely.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)