https://caltonjock.com/2016/04/04/po...ng-the-tories/
Printable View
Notice it didn't get onto the BBC until after the elections..now what a surprise!
Maybe I'm cynical, but charges possible isn't the same as charges likely.....and while they may be possible, will they be likely in this country against this government (or any government), particularly if it might dent their majority? After all, if Westminster has nothing else, it has a carpet which can only be walked on, standing upright, by people of 5 ft 2 or under, because so much stuff has been swept under it over the years that it is now that near the ceiling. :Razz
I wonder what that carpet feels like? I suspect sort of spongy in parts and crunchy in others and probably uneven with heaps piled up in places so that the 5ft 2-ers are in danger of losing their footing and tumbling over!
By elections? Why?
When someone is voted in, they stay in, unless something much worse than an expensive bus happens.
No, they don't, not if they have broken the election rules and can't flannel their way out of it (or know someone who can make it all go away). That is one of the rules of being elected to Westminster, Holyrood or a Local Council, if you break the rules the election is void and has to be rerun, though nothing stopping you standing again. .Quote:
Originally Posted by sids
Don't you remember Alex McLeod was dunted because he didn't include the cost of his accommodation in Caithness, when contesting Wick Landward in his local election returns? It doesn't matter even if he didn't actually pay anything for the accommodation, he should have put a financial value on it and declared it as notional spending.
I stood in my home area in 1999 for the local council, but was not living in it at the time....and if I had got in, I might have fallen foul of the rules.....because I thought that staying with my brother and sister-in-law was different to staying at an hotel or a B&B....but I suppose, if they hadn't been there, as I don't drive, I would likely have had to pay for B&B, so I could wander the area going door to door....so I guess it should have counted under estimated expenditure on goods and services that would have been incurred if they had not been provided free of charge or a non-commercial discount of more than 10%.
No, I cannot remember an Alex McLeod and I don't know what "dunted" means in his case.
And what what might have happened because of what you might have done if people might have voted for you, is somewhat hypothetical.
The bit in italics was a direct quote from a current candidates election return. I was never given a copy of the rules (although they might not have been the same in 1999) and as I wasn't elected, it wasn't a problem anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by sids
Here's a link to the BBC re the councillor who got removed(dunted) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...lands-25232845 The original accusation was over accommodation expenses but escalated from that.
A councillor can be disqualified if they have been found to have submitted a misleading record of expenses...and the same applies in any election.
Says he plead guilty to fraud, resigned and said he would not seek re-election.
The whole point of my response was to disabuse you of your notion that once someone is elected it takes more than the cost of an expensive bus to remove them.....because all it can take to be fraud is not putting a monetary value on something you receive free, like accommodation, if that puts you over the legal spending limits. That was part of the complaint in the Alex McLeod case. I was interested at the time, because I voted for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by sids
Try this link
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...laim-1-3110960
OK, councillors (who resigned) notwithstanding, how many by-elections do you expect this expensive bus to cause?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sids
If you are a cynic about the police and the DPP, given so much of their record of not doing anything about behaviour in Westminster, of a kind which would have had any of us at least in court, if not jailed,.....I don't expect any, but I'd be delighted to be proved wrong.
I note that 19 police forces are now investigating claims that 28 Conservative MPs benefited from ‘battle buses'(and attendant canvassing benefits) but did not declare the costs locally. I also note that the Conservatives have maintained that failure to declare accommodation costs was the result of an “administrative error.” (or rather 28 administrative errors)..which is either extracting the urine or extreme incompetency.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddquine
I am still not about to hold my breath waiting for prosecutions and any by-elections before the end of this Parliamentary term, though.
They should take into account the number of people put off voting Tory, by battle-busloads of twits blocking the town centres.