Ooops

This looks a little more serious than some of the other matters recently reported:

Alan Bown, a retired bookmaker, gave the cash between December 2004 and January 2006.

However,
election watchdogs have apparently discovered that Mr Bown, who also
runs a bathrobe company, was not on the electoral register during that
period.

Under the Political Parties, Elections and
Referendums Act 2000, individual donations are invalid if the donor is
not registered as a voter when the money is given.

In
a letter sent last night to Bruce Lawson, the Ukip treasurer, the
Commission confirmed that it "will be proceeding to apply to court for
the forfeiture of £363,697 in respect of 68 donations from Mr Bown made
during the period December 2004 to January 2006".

The people I think should be truly worried about this are the Lib Dems. If the Electoral Commission is sticking rigidly to the rules then their much larger donations from Michael Brown must also be suspect at least.

10 responses

  1. Tim,
    “The people I think should be truly worried about this are the Lib Dems.”
    Or not
    DK
    P.S. Now we know what the problems are, it does show that the ones “brought to light” by The Sunday Torygraph are just so much horseshit.

  2. So let me get this straight:
    Senior members of one political party appear to have given seats in parliament to people who helped them out financially. Sum involved: many millions
    A second party accept a large cheque from a rather shady individual without, it appears, performing even a rudimentary check to see if the guy is legit. Sum involved: 2.4 million
    Another party accepts donations from a chap who, according to that same party, wasn’t eligable to do so simply because he had forgotten to fill in his annual electoral roll form. Sum involved: 400 thousand.
    Regardless of one’s political affiliation it’s not hard to see which of the three is the least deserving of punishment. Still, I guess where politics is concerned one should abandon any hope of fair and equitable application of the law.
    I wonder if this has anything to do with UKIPP opposing state handouts to political parties?

  3. One thing that has not been confirmed, as far as I know, is whether Mr Bown is a UK citizen (and by naturalisation or birth). Does anyone know?
    Best regards
    Tim ads: Which Brown? The Bookie? If he was and now is again on the electoral register then I assume that he is.

  4. Mark Wadsworth Avatar
    Mark Wadsworth

    This victimisation of UKIP is absolutely digusting by any stretch of the imagination.

  5. The most vile aspect of it is that the money is not returned but accrues to the Treasury.
    Right, roll up your sleeves boys: 3,600 donors at a hundred sovs a time will do it. I’d contribute, but I genuinely am ineligible.

  6. Tim adds, to my previous post: “Which [Bown]? The Bookie? If he was and now is again on the electoral register then I assume that he is.”
    Is it not more complicated than that? Try Registering for a Vote
    It seems that non-UK EU citizens are entitled to vote in EU elections in the UK, but not national and local authority elections. Commonwealth citizens resident in the UK are entitled to vote in all elections.
    It also seems that, under the current rules, UK citizens resident outside the UK are not entitled to fund UK political parties. So, it seems to me a strange arrangement, for example, that a Frenchman resident (only) in the UK is entitled to fund UK political parties, but a UK citizen resident (only) in France is not.
    So my earlier question is, at least in my opinion, of some (perhaps modest) relevance. I would therefore prefer Tim not to poo-poo it, so putting off the getting of an answer. [And this despite my recognition of all his rights in the private property which is this his good blog.]
    Best regards
    Tim adds: What do you mean not getting an answer? I gave you the one I thought was correct?
    Still, if UK citizens non-resident are now allowed to fund parties at least I can’t be asked to help make up the shortfall.

  7. Tim adds: “What do you mean not getting an answer? I gave you the one I thought was correct?”
    Yes, but the way you phrased it made me think you knew no more than me.
    Before fetching my high horse “Voltaire” from the stable, and riding him into battle in support of Mr Bown and UKIP (a party whose right to exist and be funded, I do indeed support, though I do not necessarily support it further), I thought it might just be worth checking on the totality of strength of the case, in common-sense terms rather than just legal ones (the law being what it now is in the UK).

  8. by the way. What ever happened to the Commission’s investigations into the apparent widescale electoral fraud going thanks to the extended postal voting arrangements.
    Surely that would be more important than what appears to be a relatively minor infringment of the funding rules.

  9. People might like to ask the Major Party Defense Association at:
    info@electoralcommission.org.uk
    if it acts on behalf of the electorate or the big parties. Please allow 20 days for a reply.

  10. It is, at worst, an unintentional technical infraction. I doubt if anybody thinks this, rather than merely selling peerages, would have been prosecuted if it had been one of the big 3.
    We live in a world where rules, having the force of law, fill literaaly hundreds of volumes. It is impossible for any of us to mever break any law because life is not long enough to read them all. The police sometimes find this useful.

Leave a Reply to Devil’s KitchenCancel reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading