DOCSLIB.ORG

Election 2001 Campaign Spending We Are an Independent Body That Was Set up by Parliament

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Election 2001 Campaign Spending We Are an Independent Body That Was Set up by Parliament Election 2001 Campaign spending We are an independent body that was set up by Parliament. We aim to gain public confidence and encourage people to take part in the democratic process within the United Kingdom by modernising the electoral process, promoting public awareness of electoral matters, and regulating political parties. On 1 April 2002, The Boundary Committee for England (formerly the Local Government Commission for England) became a statutory committee of The Electoral Commission. Its duties include reviewing local election boundaries. © The Electoral Commission 2002 ISBN: 1-904363-08-3 1 Contents List of tables, appendices and returns 2 Conclusions 45 Preface 5 Political parties 45 Executive summary 7 Third parties 46 Spending by political parties 7 Candidates’ expenses 46 Spending by third parties 7 Future work programme 47 Spending by candidates 7 Introduction 9 Appendices The role of The Electoral Commission 10 Appendix 1 49 Campaign expenditure by political parties 11 Appendix 2 50 The spending limit 12 Appendix 3 87 Interpretation of legislation 12 Appendix 4 89 Public and media interest in the campaign 13 Appendix 5 90 Commission guidance 13 Appendix 6 97 Completing and reviewing the expenditure returns 13 Candidates’ election expenses at the Analysis of returns 14 2001 general election 99 Northern Ireland analysis 15 Great Britain analysis 17 Problems in categorising expenditure 18 Breakdown of total expenditure: the main three British parties 18 Other parties and trends 19 Apportionment and spending in England, Scotland and Wales 20 England, Scotland and Wales analysis 22 Unpaid and late claims 24 Controlled expenditure by recognised third parties 25 The regulated period: third parties 25 Interpretation of the legislation 25 Registration 26 Commission guidance 27 Third parties’ expenditure 27 Campaign expenditure by candidates 30 Prescribed limits on spending 31 Election expenses 32 Spending by candidates 32 Spending patterns by nation 34 Spending patterns by party affiliation 35 Marginal constituencies and successful candidates 39 Spending patterns by category of expenditure 40 Election 2001 – Campaign spending November 2002 2 List of tables, appendices and returns Tables Appendices Table 1 Campaign expenditure incurred by parties in Appendix 1 List of parties that contested the general Northern Ireland, June 2001 election in Northern Ireland and Great Britain Table 2 Campaign expenditure incurred by British Appendix 2 Information submitted in campaign parties represented at Westminster, June 2001 expenditure return Table 3 Proportion of total party expenditure spent on Appendix 3 Categories of campaign expenditure: Schedule different categories of campaign activity, 8 to PPERA June 2001 Appendix 4 List of recognised third parties at the Table 4 Campaign expenditure in England, June 2001 general election Table 5 Campaign expenditure in Scotland, June 2001 Appendix 5 Information submitted in controlled expenditure return Table 6 Campaign expenditure in Wales, June 2001 Appendix 6 Candidates at the general election who failed Table 7 Candidates’ election expenses at Parliamentary to submit a return or who declared expenditure general elections, 1945-2001 in excess of the statutory expenses limit Table 8 Candidates’ election expenses, by country, June 2001 Returns: political parties Table 9 All candidates, by percentage of permitted Return 1 British National Party maximum spent, by country, June 2001 Return 2 Communist Party Return 3 Conservative and Unionist Party (GB) Table 10 All candidates, by percentage of permitted Return 4 Co-operative Party maximum spent, by party, June 2001 Return 5 Fancy Dress Party Return 6 Free Party Table 11 Elected candidates, by percentage of Return 7 Green Party permitted maximum spent, by party, June 2001 Return 8 Grey Party Table 12 Elected candidates, by percentage of Return 9 Labour Party permitted maximum spent, by nation, Return 10 Legalise Cannabis Alliance June 2001 Return 11 Liberal Democrats Return 12 Liberal Party Table 13 Candidates’ election expenses, by party, Return 13 Marxist Party June 2001 Return 14 Mebyon Kernow Return 15 Muslim Party Table 14 Candidates’ election expenses, June 2001 Return 16 National Front Return 17 New Britain Return 18 Pacifist Party Return 19 Pensioner Coalition Election 2001 – Campaign spending November 2002 3 Return 20 Plaid Cymru Return 21 ProLife Alliance Return 22 Residents and Motorists of Great Britain Return 23 Scottish Green Party Return 24 Scottish National Party Return 25 Scottish Socialist Party Return 26 Socialist Alliance Return 27 Socialist Labour Party Return 28 United Kingdom Independence Party Return 29 Welsh Socialist Alliance Return 30 Alliance Party of NI Return 31 Conservative and Unionist Party (NI) Return 32 Democratic Unionist Party Return 33 Social Democratic and Labour Party Return 34 Sinn Fein Return 35 Ulster Unionist Party Return 36 United Kingdom Unionist Party Returns: recognised third parties Return 37 Campaign for an Independent Britain Return 38 Charter 88 Return 39 Democracy Movement Return 40 Manufacturing, Science and Finance Union Return 41 Society for the Protection of Unborn Children Return 42 Tacticalvoter.Net Ltd Return 43 South Molton Declaration Return 44 Unison Return 45 Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers Return 46 Yes Campaign Election 2001 – Campaign spending November 2002 5 Preface This is the first report of its kind. It The provisions of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, which came into effect for the first brings together details of the time at the election last year, requires parties to provide the campaign spending by political Commission with detailed information on their national campaign spending. This report provides a detailed parties, third parties and candidates commentary on how they used the funds available to them at the 2001 general election under the newly imposed spending limits to conduct their campaigns. This kind of information has not previously been available. Although the Government previously published figures for candidates spending, this report provides for the first time an analysis of the information highlighting the variations in spending patterns between candidates and parties. By bringing together spending at both the national and local level we are able to see a much fuller picture of the overall spending by parties. I am sure the information in this report will be of continuing interest to parties, academics, media and others with an interest in elections. The report marks an important step in bringing greater transparency and openness to the campaign spending of political parties. It also highlights a number of challenges for the Commission and parties in dealing with the new regulatory framework. Sam Younger Chairman, The Electoral Commission November 2002 Election 2001 – Campaign spending November 2002 7 Executive summary Spending by political parties unsolicited material to electors. In Northern Ireland, the main areas of expenditure were advertising and party • The general election of 2001 was the first where party political broadcasts. campaign expenditure was regulated, following the commencement of the Political Parties, Elections and • Political parties reported that they had had some Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA). PPERA introduced difficulty in accurately and consistently categorising spending limits and restricted the number of people expenditure to meet the reporting format. The within a party who could authorise campaign Commission also identified that there were a number of expenditure. failures by parties to apportion correctly expenditure between England, Scotland and Wales. • The legislation created difficulties of interpretation for The Electoral Commission as well as parties contesting the • A number of parties were unaware that PPERA made it general election. The Commission advised parties on illegal to pay any claims for campaign expenditure that items that should be included in the campaign were received more than 21 days after the date of the expenditure return, including VAT. There was some poll, or to pay claims that were received during the confusion about the distinction between candidates’ permitted period more than 42 days after the date of election expenses and party expenditure. the poll. • A total of 80 registered political parties fielded Spending by third parties candidates at the election and were bound by the new requirements. However, of these parties, only 36 • For the first time, spending on national election material incurred any expenditure that had to be reported to distributed by groups not fielding candidates for election the Commission. was regulated. • £26,689,901 was spent across the UK by the 36 parties • A total of 10 organisations promoting a variety of that incurred campaign expenditure at the election. Of different views registered as recognised third parties this, £26,258,260 was spent in Great Britain and during the regulated period for the general election in £431,641 was spent in Northern Ireland. 2001. This was fewer than the number that had been expected to register. A number of organisations that • £22,348,075 campaign expenditure was incurred in contacted the Commission about the need to register England, £2,523,086 in Scotland and £1,387,099 subsequently took the view that they were not in Wales. distributing material which fell within the scope of • Of the total expenditure incurred by parties in the UK, the controls. £23,696,932, or 88.8%, was incurred
Load more

Recommended publications
  • South Scotland Election Agents
    OFFICIAL Scottish Parliamentary Notice of Appointment of Election Agents and Sub-Agents Election Region SOUTH SCOTLAND Date of poll Thursday 6 May 2021 The following is a notice of Election Agents appointed by Parties and Individual Candidates in the election of Members of the Scottish Parliament for the above Region. I, Lorna Meahan, Depute Regional Returning Officer, hereby give notice that the following names of Election Agents of Parties and Individual candidates at this election, and the addresses of the offices of such Election Agents to which all claims, notices, writs, summons, and other documents addressed to them may be sent, have respectively been declared in writing to me as follows: Name of Party Name of Agent Offices of Election Agent to which claims etc may be sent Abolish the Scottish Parliament Party John Mortimer Flat 2/2, 2 Rhynie Drive, Glasgow, G51 2LE Alba Party Isabella Zambonini 42 Market Street, Ellon, Aberdeenshire, AB41 9JD All for Unity James Giles Suite 2, Fullarton House, 4 Fullarton Street, Ayr, KA7 1UB Freedom Alliance- Integrity, Society, Economy Mary Steven 9 Ralston Road, Barrhead, East Renfrewshire, G78 2QQ Independent Green Voice Alistair McConnachie Clyde Offices, 2nd Floor, 48 West George Street, Glasgow, G2 1BP Reform UK Martyn Greene 7/9 North St David Street, Edinburgh, EH2 1AW Scotia Future Charles Brodie 23 Maybole Road, Ayr, KA7 2PZ Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Mark McInnes 67 Northumberland Street, Edinburgh, EH3 6JG Scottish Family Party Michael Willis 29 Coney Park, Stirling,
    [Show full text]
  • "Third Way" Republicanism in the Formation of the Irish Republic Kenneth Lee Shonk, Jr
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects "Irish Blood, English Heart": Gender, Modernity, and "Third Way" Republicanism in the Formation of the Irish Republic Kenneth Lee Shonk, Jr. Marquette University Recommended Citation Shonk, Jr., Kenneth Lee, ""Irish Blood, English Heart": Gender, Modernity, and "Third Way" Republicanism in the Formation of the Irish Republic" (2010). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 53. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/53 “IRISH BLOOD, ENGLISH HEART”: GENDER, MODERNITY, AND “THIRD-WAY” REPUBLICANISM IN THE FORMATION OF THE IRISH REPUBLIC By Kenneth L. Shonk, Jr., B.A., M.A., M.A.T. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2010 ABSTRACT “IRISH BLOOD, ENGLISH HEART”: GENDER, MODERNITY, AND “THIRD-WAY” REPUBLICANISM IN THE FORMATION OF THE IRISH REPUBLIC Kenneth L. Shonk, Jr., B.A., M.A., M.A.T. Marquette University, 2010 Led by noted Irish statesman Eamon de Valera, a cadre of former members of the militaristic republican organization Sinn Féin split to form Fianna Fáil with the intent to reconstitute Irish republicanism so as to fit within the democratic frameworks of the Irish Free State. Beginning with its formation in 1926, up through the passage of a republican constitution in 1937 that was recognized by Great Britain the following year, Fianna Fáil had successfully rescued the seemingly moribund republican movement from complete marginalization. Using gendered language to forge a nexus between primordial cultural nationalism and modernity, Fianna Fáil’s nationalist project was tantamount to efforts anti- hegemonic as well as hegemonic.
    [Show full text]
  • The Irish Left Over 50 Years
    & Workers’ Liberty SolFor siociadl ownershaip of the branks aind intdustry y No 485 7 November 2018 50p/£1 The DEMAND EVERY Irish left over 50 LABOUR MP years VOTES AGAINST See pages 6-8 The May government and its Brexit process are bracing themselves to take the coming weeks at a run, trying to hurtle us all over a rickety bridge. Yet it looks like they could be saved by some Labour MPs voting for the To - ries’ Brexit formula. More page 5 NUS set to gut BREXIT democracy Maisie Sanders reports on financial troubles at NUS and how the left should respond. See page 3 “Fake news” within the left Cathy Nugent calls for the left to defend democracy and oppose smears. See page 10 Join Labour! Why Labour is losing Jews See page 4 2 NEWS More online at www.workersliberty.org Push Labour to “remain and reform” May will say that is still the ulti - trade deals is now for the birds. mate objective, but for not for years Britain will not be legally able to in - to come. troduce any new deals until the fu - The second option, which is often ture long-term treaty relationship John Palmer talked to equated with “hard” Brexit, is no with the EU has been negotiated, at deal. That is a theoretical possibil - the end of a tunnel which looks Solidarity ity. But I don’t think in practice cap - longer and longer. ital in Britain or elsewhere in The job of the left, the supporters S: You’ve talked about a Europe has any interest in that, and of the Corbyn leadership of the “Schrödinger’s Brexit”..
    [Show full text]
  • Why Some People Switch Political Parties: New Research 13 July 2021, by Paul Webb and Tim Bale
    Why some people switch political parties: New research 13 July 2021, by Paul Webb and Tim Bale Our new research sheds light on the truth of party- switching politics—how many people really switch, why people are motivated to do so, and whether the claims of entryism are credible. Patterns of party-switching We surveyed nearly 7,000 members of British political parties (including registered Brexit Party supporters) within two weeks of the 2019 general election. When we analyzed the data, we found a remarkably high proportion of our sample (23%) claimed to have previously been—or, if we allow for registered Brexit Party supporters as well, currently were—members of a different political party than the Credit: CC0 Public Domain one to which they were now affiliated. Some 29% of Tory members who admitted in 2019 to having been members of other parties claim to Why do some people switch political parties? After have been UKIP members. Interestingly, though, all, if someone is committed enough to a particular virtually as many were former Labor members. As a vision of politics, wouldn't they be relatively proportion of all Conservative Party grassroots immune to the charms of its competitors? members, these figures amount to 3% who were former members of UKIP, 4.5% who were It turns out, however, that switching parties at simultaneously Brexit Party supporters, and 4% grassroots membership level is by no means who were ex-Labor members. uncommon, even giving rise in some quarters to accusations of "entryism." This puts into perspective the scale of the entryist phenomenon.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
    Tuesday Volume 553 20 November 2012 No. 71 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Tuesday 20 November 2012 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2012 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 421 20 NOVEMBER 2012 422 Mr Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight) (Con): Two weeks House of Commons ago, the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (Miss Tuesday 20 November 2012 Smith), gave evidence to the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, and said that political and constitutional reforms were worth while only when The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock there was a public appetite for them. Does the Deputy Prime Minister think there is a public appetite for any PRAYERS of the proposals he has just mentioned? The Deputy Prime Minister: Clearly, the priority for [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] all of us is to repair, rescue and reform the damaged British economy—the legacy left to us by Labour—but BUSINESS BEFORE QUESTIONS I have always been of the view that that does not mean that the Government cannot do more than two things at CITY OF LONDON (VARIOUS POWERS)BILL [LORDS] once. Those things could include mayoral elections, (BY ORDER) police and crime commissioner elections—which I know Second Reading opposed and deferred until Tuesday are close to the heart of the hon. Gentleman’s party—or 27 November (Standing Order No. 20). other political reform enthusiasms shared by my party.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking out of Britain's Neo-Liberal State
    cDIREoCTIONmFOR THE pass DEMOCRATIC LEFT Breaking out of Britain’s Neo-Liberal State January 2009 Gerry Hassan and Anthony Barnett 3 4 r Tr hink e b m m u N PIECES 3 4 Tr hink e b m u N PIECES Breaking out of Britain’s Neo-Liberal State Gerry Hassan and Anthony Barnett “In the big-dipper of UK politics, the financial crisis suddenly re-reversed these terms. Gordon Brown excavated a belief in Keynesian solutions from his social democratic past and a solidity of purpose that was lacking from Blair’s lightness of being” Compass publications are intended to create real debate and discussion around the key issues facing the democratic left - however the views expressed in this publication are not a statement of Compass policy. Breaking out of Britain’s Neo-Liberal State www.compassonline.org.uk PAGE 1 Breaking out of Britain’s reduced for so many, is under threat with The British Empire State Building Neo-Liberal State no state provisions in place for them. The political and even military consequences England’s “Glorious Revolution” of 1688 Gerry Hassan and Anthony Barnett could well be dire. created a framework of compromise between monarchy and Parliament. It was Nonetheless we should celebrate the followed by the union of England with possible defeat of one aspect of neo- Scotland of 1707, which joined two he world we have lived in, liberal domination. It cheered the different countries while preserving their created from the twin oil-price destruction of a communist world that distinct legal traditions. Since then the T shockwaves of 1973 and 1979 was oppressive and unfree.
    [Show full text]
  • Case Study on the United Kingdom and Brexit Juliane Itta & Nicole Katsioulis the Female Face of Right-Wing Populism and Ex
    Triumph of The women? The Female Face of Right-wing Populism and Extremism 02 Case study on the United Kingdom and Brexit Juliane Itta & Nicole Katsioulis 01 Triumph of the women? The study series All over the world, right-wing populist parties continue to grow stronger, as has been the case for a number of years – a development that is male-dominated in most countries, with right-wing populists principally elected by men. However, a new generation of women is also active in right-wing populist parties and movements – forming the female face of right-wing populism, so to speak. At the same time, these parties are rapidly closing the gap when it comes to support from female voters – a new phenomenon, for it was long believed that women tend to be rather immune to right-wing political propositions. Which gender and family policies underpin this and which societal trends play a part? Is it possible that women are coming out triumphant here? That is a question that we already raised, admittedly playing devil’s advocate, in the first volume of the publication, published in 2018 by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Triumph of the women? The Female Face of the Far Right in Europe. We are now continuing this first volume with a series of detailed studies published at irregular intervals. This is partly in response to the enormous interest that this collection of research has aroused to date in the general public and in professional circles. As a foundation with roots in social democracy, from the outset one of our crucial concerns has been to monitor anti-democratic tendencies and developments, while also providing information about these, with a view to strengthening an open and democratic society thanks to these insights.
    [Show full text]
  • Senedd Election South Wales Central Local Results Vale of Glamorgan
    Senedd Cymru Elections: 6 May 2021 Local Totals for the South Wales Central Region: Vale of Glamorgan Constituency I Debbie Marles Constituency Returning Officer for the Vale of Glamorgan constituency declare that the total number of votes given to each party and individual candidate at the regional election in the Vale of Glamorgan constituency was as follows: Yr wyf i ar ran y Swyddog Canlyniadau Etholaethol ar gyfer etholaeth Bro Morgannwg yn datgan bod cyfanswm nifer y pleidleisiau a roddwyd i bob plaid ac ymgeisydd unigol yn yr etholiad rhanbarthol ym Mro Morgannwg fel y ganlyn: Candidate name Description (if any) Total number of votes for candidate ABOLISH THE WELSH 1875 ASSEMBLY PARTY BRITAIN’S COMMUNIST 67 PARTY / PLAID GOMIWNYDDOL PRYDAIN CEIDWADWYR CYMREIG / 15232 WELSH CONSERVATIVES 1936 GREEN PARTY / PLAID WERDD GWLAD – PLAID 185 ANNIBYNIAETH CYMRU / GWLAD – THE WELSH INDEPENDENCE PARTY 189 NO MORE LOCKDOWNS 5291 PLAID CYMRU - THE PARTY OF WALES PROPEL: WALES NEEDS 474 CHAMPIONS / PROPEL: MAE CYMRU ANGEN PENCAMPWYR 370 REFORM UK – CHANGING POLITICS FOR GOOD 562 UKIP SCRAP THE ASSEMBLY / SENEDD 15150 WELSH LABOUR / LLAFUR CYMRU WELSH LIBERAL 1196 DEMOCRATS – PUT RECOVERY FIRST / DEMOCRATIAID RHYDDFRYDOL CYMRU – ADFYWIO YW’R FLAENORIAETH WELSH TRADE UNIONIST 60 AND SOCIALIST COALITION WORKERS PARTY 87 COULTHARD, ALAN Independent / Annibynnol 142 TERENCE The total number of ballot papers rejected at the Regional Election in the Vale of Glamorgan Constituency was 270 Cyfanswm nifer y papurau pleidleisio a wrthodwyd oedd 270 The
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorist Speech and the Future of Free Expression
    TERRORIST SPEECH AND THE FUTURE OF FREE EXPRESSION Laura K. Donohue* Introduction.......................................................................................... 234 I. State as Sovereign in Relation to Terrorist Speech ...................... 239 A. Persuasive Speech ............................................................ 239 1. Sedition and Incitement in the American Context ..... 239 a. Life Before Brandenburg................................. 240 b. Brandenburg and Beyond................................ 248 2. United Kingdom: Offences Against the State and Public Order ....................................................................... 250 a. Treason............................................................. 251 b. Unlawful Assembly ......................................... 254 c. Sedition ............................................................ 262 d. Monuments and Flags...................................... 268 B. Knowledge-Based Speech ................................................ 271 1. Prior Restraint in the American Context .................... 272 a. Invention Secrecy Act...................................... 274 b. Atomic Energy Act .......................................... 279 c. Information Relating to Explosives and Weapons of Mass Destruction............................................ 280 2. Strictures in the United Kingdom............................... 287 a. Informal Restrictions........................................ 287 b. Formal Strictures: The Export Control Act ..... 292 II. State in
    [Show full text]
  • ALL the QUEEN's AGENTS & CORPORATIONS the Queen's
    ALL THE QUEEN’S AGENTS & CORPORATIONS The Queen’s Prerogative English law prohibits questioning the Monarchy about their personal holdings and business. This is true of most of Europe’s royalty, whether enthroned or not. The wealth of the Monarchies is held outside of the countries that made the wealth. The British Crown’s offshore banks hold the greatest personal wealth in the world estimated at $35 trillion. Perhaps the British Crown still owns and controls its Commonwealth Nations, including the American “colonies.” Monarchies are not supposed to be warlord bankers who create conflict and chaos to turn a profit or destabilize an economy for personal gain. But they have been for some time now, and history is a string of immoral wars caused by monarchies, the Vatican and other religions. Untold millions have died while kings and popes lived on to grab the wealth through well-established institutions that were created to control the people of the Earth. The Commonwealth of Nations, headed by Queen Elizabeth II, is made up of 53 nations, spanning the globe, accounting for one-fifth of the land mass of the Earth, and a very high percentage of its strategic resources and population. The Queen is a Knight of Malta and has vowed allegiance to the Pope through the largest insider trading club on the planet. The British Crown Agents are, in fact, also agents of the Vatican’s Knights of Malta. The Queen is a Knight of Malta The Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM) took control of the power and wealth of the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon from within the Roman system.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnicising Ulster's Protestants
    Ethnicising Ulster’s Protestants Tolerance, Peoplehood, and Class in Ulster-Scots Ethnopedagogy Peter Robert Gardner Jesus College, The University of Cambridge This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Contents Figures and Tables iv Abbreviations and Short Forms v Acknowledgements vi Word Limit and Plagiarism Statement vii Abstract viii Chapter One: Introduction 1 1.1 Research Questions, Methods and Chapter Overview 5 1.2 Tolerance, Peoplehood, Dignity 7 Chapter Two: Protestantism, Unionism and Consociational Ideology 11 2.1 Shifting Peoplehoods 12 2.1.1 From British Rule to Unionist Rule 12 2.1.2 From Multiplicity toward Britishness 15 2.1.3 Defeatism and the Cultural Turn 18 2.2 Consociationalism, Normativity, Power 21 2.3 Ulster-Scots 26 2.3.1 Ethnic Peoplehood 26 2.3.2 Who are the Ulster-Scots? 30 2.3.3 “Revival” 35 2.4 Conclusion 38 Chapter Three: Communal Segregation and Educational Peace-Building 39 3.1 The Current State of Segregation 39 3.2 Segregated Education 45 3.3 Education and Peace-Building 55 3.4 Conclusion: De-segregating the Mind 63 Chapter Four: Methods 65 4.1 Research Design and Methods 65 4.1.1 Educational Materials 66 4.1.2 Interviews 67 4.1.3. Primary School Survey 69 4.2 Analysis 70 4.2.1 Euphemism, “Telling” and Reading Silences 72 4.2.2 Reflexivity, Stickiness and Power Dynamics 75 4.3 Conclusion 78 Chapter Five: The Development of Ulster-Scots Education 79 5.1 Processes of Peoplehood-Building 79 5.2 Three Phases of Development 81 5.2.1 Phase One: Grass-Roots Education, Elite Lobbying
    [Show full text]
  • Core Strategy DPD Annexes to Sustainability Appraisal Report
    Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council Local Development Framework Core Strategy DPD Annexes to Sustainability Appraisal Report April 2010 If you would like this leaflet in large print, on audio tape, in Braille or on disk, please contact: Planning Policy Team Communities, Regeneration & Environment Directorate Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council FREEPOST Stockport SK1 3YQ Telephone: 0161 474 4395 Fax: 0161 474 4586 Core Strategy DPD: Annexes to Sustainability Appraisal Report Annex 1 Rapid Health Impact Assessment Screening Report Stockport Core Strategy DPD Rapid Health Impact Assessment Screening Report Date: September 2009 (Reviewed January 2010) Author: Angie Jukes, BSc, MSc. Health & Environment Advisor (Planning) Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council Reviewed by: Dr Stephen Watkins, Director of Public Health, NHS Stockport Health Impact Assessment Team at NHS Stockport Planning Policy Team at Stockport MBC Stockport Local Strategic Partnership Contents 1.0 Executive Summary 2.0 Introduction 2.1 Stockport’s Local Development Framework 2.2 Why do Health Impact Assessment? 2.3 Sustainability Appraisal 2.4 HIA Methodology 2.5 A Health Portrait of Stockport 3.0 HIA Rapid Assessment Findings 3.1 Environmental Conditions 3.2 Socio Economic & Cultural Conditions 3.3 Social & Community Networks 3.4 Lifestyle 4.0 Conclusions & Recommendations to Policy Makers 4.1 Significant Issues 4.2 Health Prevention 4.3 Two birds with one stone 4.4 Recommendations 5.0 Consultation Process & Next Steps Appendix 1 NHS Stockport Pro Forma Drafted Application to Core Strategy Emerging Objectives & Policies 1.0 Executive Summary The Local Development Framework (LDF) incorporates the Core Strategy which is the most important document in the LDF because it sets an overall strategy and vision, establishing the broad aims and objectives for the use of land in Stockport.
    [Show full text]