See link http://uk.news.yahoo.com/26042006/140/woman-arrested-election-fraud.html
We should all be seriously concerned about this.
Although the article above refers to postal vote malpractice in Birmingham, where it was famously detected 2 years ago, I feel the prevalence of postal voting nowadays is an open invitation to electoral malpractice by politicians on a scale not seen since the mid-19th century. My own Borough, Kingston upon Thames, now has 15,515 people entitled to vote by post, whereas only a few years ago the number would have been measured in hundreds.
This dramatic change is because anyone can now have a postal vote on demand, whereas previously one had to be able to give a reason why one couldn't attend the polling station in person. If the reason was illness, the application had to be countersigned by a doctor. Other reasons may have been the nature of one's employment or, in my case in 1983 and 1987, being a candidate at the General Election in a constituency far from home, or having moved to another part of the country. In the last case no postal vote was allowed for local government elections.
Nowadays innumerable ballot papers are issued to people who are dead or have left the address to which the paper is sent or just not bothered about voting or basically ignorant of the system. Such papers are an easy prey for activists locally who might collect them and mark them according to their own wishes.
Someone may have asked for a postal vote in your name to be sent to an address other than yours. You might not find out until you turn up at the polling station - and if you stay away from it, you won't find out at all. And don't say it doesn't happen here. In Birmingham it was proved to have happened in 2004 on something approaching an industrial scale - a system that would 'disgrace a banana republic', as the Judge remarked at the trial.
Can't the electoral officers in our Town Hall check to see that all the papers returned are 'in order'? In theory they do and my experience is that they are conscientious and diligent people - certainly in Kingston they are - but they are also very few and are now dealing with 10 or more times as many postal ballots as they were 10 years ago, but with the same number of staff. So do the maths yourself.
The perpetrators in one Birmingham ward were caught and punished, but they were the tip of the iceberg. There's a serious threat to the integrity of our elections going on here and Blair and Prescott are doing nothing about it. I wonder why.
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Friday, April 28, 2006
Out of FOCUS II
At last the Lib Dems have put some 'literature' through my door. Previously I have had to comment only on what was delivered elsewhere.
The latest effort is called the 'Surrey Express'. They must think people are simpletons and believe that this is a bona fide newspaper commenting objectively in a 'FREE Local Election Special' (sic) - as though people would otherwise have to pay for it and would willingly do so.
Interestingly they do admit that there is a 'neck and neck race' for control of the Borough. Considering they are defending an overall majority of 12 and currently have twice as many councillors as the Tories and 10-times the number of Labour, this is quite an astonishing admission of how vulnerable their deplorable administration of the Borough has made them.
Again they try to change the subject and divert attention from their failures into a campaign for a 'fair deal for Kingston'. They completely fail to note that the funding imbalances to which they draw attention are nothing new. Outer London Boroughs have been significantly worse funded by central government since the present London Local Government set-up was established in 1963. They therefore emphatically do not explain why a party with such overwhelming power as they have had has so signally failed to get a grip on the Borough's finances.
We have also further attempts to smear the Conservative Minority administration between 1998 and 2002. They don't admit that it was a minority administration and that THEY, year on year, kept it in being. This time they produce some figures about responsibility allowances paid to our Leaders during that time. What they don't say is how much was paid in responsibility allwances to Derek Osbourne and Roger Hayes (their leaders) during the same period. Not much less actually. Nor do they point out that from 2000 onwards their members chaired the Overview Panels, one being Labour, and were paid responsibility allowances at the same rate as Cabinet members.
But most risible of all is a call from the ineffable Edward Davey MP to 're-elect a Council that's kept its promises.' What about its promise not to sink any more public money into the Theatre project - broken shamelessly last year to the tune of £3,000,000 or £250,000 a year in interest alone? All this without ever once allowing the elected representatives of the Council Tax payers a single opportunity to debate the issue in the open in full Council.
Mr. Davey should be ashamed of himself for putting his name to such hypocritical nonsense as this.
The latest effort is called the 'Surrey Express'. They must think people are simpletons and believe that this is a bona fide newspaper commenting objectively in a 'FREE Local Election Special' (sic) - as though people would otherwise have to pay for it and would willingly do so.
Interestingly they do admit that there is a 'neck and neck race' for control of the Borough. Considering they are defending an overall majority of 12 and currently have twice as many councillors as the Tories and 10-times the number of Labour, this is quite an astonishing admission of how vulnerable their deplorable administration of the Borough has made them.
Again they try to change the subject and divert attention from their failures into a campaign for a 'fair deal for Kingston'. They completely fail to note that the funding imbalances to which they draw attention are nothing new. Outer London Boroughs have been significantly worse funded by central government since the present London Local Government set-up was established in 1963. They therefore emphatically do not explain why a party with such overwhelming power as they have had has so signally failed to get a grip on the Borough's finances.
We have also further attempts to smear the Conservative Minority administration between 1998 and 2002. They don't admit that it was a minority administration and that THEY, year on year, kept it in being. This time they produce some figures about responsibility allowances paid to our Leaders during that time. What they don't say is how much was paid in responsibility allwances to Derek Osbourne and Roger Hayes (their leaders) during the same period. Not much less actually. Nor do they point out that from 2000 onwards their members chaired the Overview Panels, one being Labour, and were paid responsibility allowances at the same rate as Cabinet members.
But most risible of all is a call from the ineffable Edward Davey MP to 're-elect a Council that's kept its promises.' What about its promise not to sink any more public money into the Theatre project - broken shamelessly last year to the tune of £3,000,000 or £250,000 a year in interest alone? All this without ever once allowing the elected representatives of the Council Tax payers a single opportunity to debate the issue in the open in full Council.
Mr. Davey should be ashamed of himself for putting his name to such hypocritical nonsense as this.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Progress Report
For our latest In Touch see www.ksca.org.uk.
We've been canvassing some of our weaker areas coupled with a one or two stronger ones. The results are most encouraging. Nick Kilby was positively ecstatic about the response in one of the former Tolworth West roads canvassed last Saturday morning. Last evening's team also had a great response in a formerly uncanvassed road where the Lib Dem rejection of massively supported petitions on local road closures was particularly resented.
Am particularly delighted that we have carried our point on Arlington Road and that it is going to get a safer pavement sooner rather than later. I'm sure the officers of RBK hadn't looked at it before Jane and I went down there and, with the help of residents, made a fuss in Committee. One up for local representation!
So far we have not seen or heard anything from the opposition apart from a rather scrappy leaflet from the Greens some weeks ago and a couple of responses to matters on this blog from an out of touch Lib Dem (I presume) called 'Anonymous'.
We've been canvassing some of our weaker areas coupled with a one or two stronger ones. The results are most encouraging. Nick Kilby was positively ecstatic about the response in one of the former Tolworth West roads canvassed last Saturday morning. Last evening's team also had a great response in a formerly uncanvassed road where the Lib Dem rejection of massively supported petitions on local road closures was particularly resented.
Am particularly delighted that we have carried our point on Arlington Road and that it is going to get a safer pavement sooner rather than later. I'm sure the officers of RBK hadn't looked at it before Jane and I went down there and, with the help of residents, made a fuss in Committee. One up for local representation!
So far we have not seen or heard anything from the opposition apart from a rather scrappy leaflet from the Greens some weeks ago and a couple of responses to matters on this blog from an out of touch Lib Dem (I presume) called 'Anonymous'.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Running scared
Could have been called 'Out of FOCUS II'.
With 3 weeks to go to the Borough elections the Lib Dems have already got nasty and personal. They usually wait until much later. This is distributed in Berrylands ward and is a grotesque attack on our Group Leader Kevin Davis. This from the same group of people who credited Edward Davey with presenting a petition against a phone mast which I actually presented in full Council before 30 of their Councillors! There's much play on what happened when the Tories 'ran' the Council - that famous myth (see http://pauljohnston.blogspot.com/2006/03/deceitful-voice.html) .
They are obviously rattled and are running scared!
With 3 weeks to go to the Borough elections the Lib Dems have already got nasty and personal. They usually wait until much later. This is distributed in Berrylands ward and is a grotesque attack on our Group Leader Kevin Davis. This from the same group of people who credited Edward Davey with presenting a petition against a phone mast which I actually presented in full Council before 30 of their Councillors! There's much play on what happened when the Tories 'ran' the Council - that famous myth (see http://pauljohnston.blogspot.com/2006/03/deceitful-voice.html) .
They are obviously rattled and are running scared!
Out of FOCUS
One annoying and less than engaging characteristic of the Lib Dems is their pretence that elections are about something that they aren't about at all.
In 1994 I fought St. Mark's Ward. It had and still has a large student population. Students were annoyed at the time at the Major government's replacement of student grants with a system of repayable loans. The Lib Dems put out FOCUS leaflets encouraging the students to vote Lib Dem to 'send a message to Major' that grants should be restored and the loan scheme be scrapped. The students obliged by voting for the Lib Dems who won the ward and the Borough. Result? The loan scheme wasn't scrapped. It's still there and has been made more arduous for students by Blair's imposition of tuition fees which will soon be increased by 'top-up' fees. Of course the Council in Kingston has not and never has had any say whatever over such matters and the Liberal Democrats knew that all along.
Now they're at it again. 'Axe the Tax' they say. They're embarrassed by their failure to tackle Council spending and the resultant hike in Council Tax to the point where Kingston residents are paying the highest Council Tax in London. So their FOCUS leaflets are now encouraging voters to vote for them again to abolish the Council Tax altogether. But again this is blatant deception. They know that Kingston Council has no control whatever over the system of financing local government and that Blair is as unlikely to be influenced by the return of a Lib Dem Council in Kingston as Major was in 1994. But they also know that they have had power over the level of the Tax in Kingston since 2002 - and that's what the election is really about.
In fact they encouraged us to vote Edward Davey into Parliament to 'axe the tax' a year ago. He got in but the tax is still there.
There is a desperate need now for politicians at all levels to tell the truth as they see it if respect is to be restored for those in public life. I wish the Lib Dems would show that they understand this too.
In 1994 I fought St. Mark's Ward. It had and still has a large student population. Students were annoyed at the time at the Major government's replacement of student grants with a system of repayable loans. The Lib Dems put out FOCUS leaflets encouraging the students to vote Lib Dem to 'send a message to Major' that grants should be restored and the loan scheme be scrapped. The students obliged by voting for the Lib Dems who won the ward and the Borough. Result? The loan scheme wasn't scrapped. It's still there and has been made more arduous for students by Blair's imposition of tuition fees which will soon be increased by 'top-up' fees. Of course the Council in Kingston has not and never has had any say whatever over such matters and the Liberal Democrats knew that all along.
Now they're at it again. 'Axe the Tax' they say. They're embarrassed by their failure to tackle Council spending and the resultant hike in Council Tax to the point where Kingston residents are paying the highest Council Tax in London. So their FOCUS leaflets are now encouraging voters to vote for them again to abolish the Council Tax altogether. But again this is blatant deception. They know that Kingston Council has no control whatever over the system of financing local government and that Blair is as unlikely to be influenced by the return of a Lib Dem Council in Kingston as Major was in 1994. But they also know that they have had power over the level of the Tax in Kingston since 2002 - and that's what the election is really about.
In fact they encouraged us to vote Edward Davey into Parliament to 'axe the tax' a year ago. He got in but the tax is still there.
There is a desperate need now for politicians at all levels to tell the truth as they see it if respect is to be restored for those in public life. I wish the Lib Dems would show that they understand this too.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Fruitcakes
I have actually very little time for UKIP. Since 1997 its principal objective seems to have been the prevention of Conservative victory in parliamentary and European elections. Its interventions have helped Labour and the Liberal Democrats by splitting off enough Conservative votes to enable candidates from those two parties - often, in fact usually, far more enthusiastic about the EU and all its works than the defeated Tory candidate - to be elected on a minority vote. That is how Edward Davey came to be our MP in Kingston & Surbiton by 56 votes in 1997. In 2004 they bit deeply into our vote in the European election and lost us, in London, an excellent MEP in the person of Richard Balfe. Last May they almost certainly did contribute to the loss of or failure to gain about 27 seats in Parliament. None of this has advanced by one inch the stated UKIP claim of bringing about the separation of the UK from the EU. UKIP actually helps the victory of the Euro-enthusiast left and thereby achieves precisely the opposite of its stated aim. I cannot believe that its leaders are unaware of this.
So do I agree with David Cameron's remarks about 'fruitcakes' or Michael Howard's earlier comments about 'political gadflies'?
No. Both were ill-judged and did UKIP more good than harm, partly by gratuitously boosting their importance at a time when they were hardly even registering on the national political consciousness. Anyone who has studied the political history of contemporary Britain must be aware that such name-calling can severely backfire on the people who do it. Who was the Labour minister in Attlee's post-war government who rashly referred to the Tories as 'vermin' - only to see a number of Tory MPs proudly sporting badges with 'VERMIN' written on them
Whatever one might think of the leaders, the ordinary folk who vote for their candidates do so for the most part from a sincerely held conviction that the EU lies at the heart of much that distresses them about contemporary Britain, such as our seeming impotence in the face of criminality and the erosion of our civil liberties, the collapse of discipline in schools and families and all that is involved in political correctness. These are not fruitcakes or gadflies. They are decent people who have traditionally looked to the Conservative Party as their natural home.
If we're going to win power, we want them back - and we must realise that there is no contradiction between getting them back and earning the support of the 'middle ground' in British politics. Anyone who thinks there is is just plain wrong.
So do I agree with David Cameron's remarks about 'fruitcakes' or Michael Howard's earlier comments about 'political gadflies'?
No. Both were ill-judged and did UKIP more good than harm, partly by gratuitously boosting their importance at a time when they were hardly even registering on the national political consciousness. Anyone who has studied the political history of contemporary Britain must be aware that such name-calling can severely backfire on the people who do it. Who was the Labour minister in Attlee's post-war government who rashly referred to the Tories as 'vermin' - only to see a number of Tory MPs proudly sporting badges with 'VERMIN' written on them
Whatever one might think of the leaders, the ordinary folk who vote for their candidates do so for the most part from a sincerely held conviction that the EU lies at the heart of much that distresses them about contemporary Britain, such as our seeming impotence in the face of criminality and the erosion of our civil liberties, the collapse of discipline in schools and families and all that is involved in political correctness. These are not fruitcakes or gadflies. They are decent people who have traditionally looked to the Conservative Party as their natural home.
If we're going to win power, we want them back - and we must realise that there is no contradiction between getting them back and earning the support of the 'middle ground' in British politics. Anyone who thinks there is is just plain wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.0.jpg)
