DOCSLIB.ORG

Medway European Election Results 2014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Medway European Election Results 2014 Medway European election results 2014 Election results, Friday 23 May Total number of verified ballot papers from the polling stations are 45,390 Total number of verified postal ballot papers is 19,867 The total number of ballot papers verified is 65,257 The electorate as of today is 193,650 And the turnout is 33.7% Election results, Sunday 25 May Party Votes cast An Independence from Europe 1702 British National Party 761 Christian Peoples Alliance 365 Conservative Party 15,043 English Democrats 667 Green Party 3684 Harmony Party 56 Labour Party 12,448 Liberal Democrats 2420 Liberty Great Britain 86 The Peace Party – Non-violence, 254 Justice, Environment The Roman Party. Ave! 84 The Socialist Party of Great Britain 171 UK Independence Party (UKIP) 27,265 YOURvoice 95 The number of ballot papers rejected and not counted at this election were: Want of official mark 0 Voting for more than one registered party 71 Writing or mark by which the voter could be identified 2 Unmarked or void for uncertainty 83 EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION South East Region 22nd May 2014 Declaration of Result I, Mark Heath, being the Regional Returning Officer for the South East at the Election of Members to serve in the European Parliament for the Electoral Region of South East held on the 22nd of May 2014, do hereby give notice that the total number of votes recorded for each registered party in that region is as follows : An Independence from Europe 45199 British National Party 16909 Christian Peoples Alliance 14893 Conservative Party 723571 English Democrats 17771 Green Party 211706 Harmony Party 1904 Labour Party 342775 Liberal Democrats 187876 Liberty Great Britain 2494 The Peace Party 10130 The Roman Party AVE 2997 The Socialist Party of Great Britain 5454 UK Independence Party (UKIP) 751439 YOURvoice 2932 The number of Votes which each Party had after the application of Subsections (5) and (9) of Section 2 of the 2002 Act at any stage when a Seat was allocated to that Party. 1 UK Independence Party (UKIP) 751439.00 Nigel Paul Farage 2 Conservative Party 723571.00 Dan Hannan 3 UK Independence Party (UKIP) 375719.50 Janice Ann Atkinson 4 Conservative Party 361785.50 Nirj Deva 5 Labour Party 342775.00 Anneliese Jane Dodds 6 UK Independence Party (UKIP) 250479.67 Diane Martine James 7 Conservative Party 241190.33 Richard James Ashworth 8 Green Party 211706.00 Keith Richard Taylor 9 Liberal Democrats 187876.00 Catherine Zena Bearder 10 UK Independence Party (UKIP) 187859.75 Ray Finch 5/26/2014 Elections Hub The remaining Candidates on each of the Party lists who have not been elected are as listed on the Statement of Parties and Individual Candidates Nominated . There were 10118 rejected ballot papers. Mark Heath Regional Returning Officer (South East) 25th May 2014 Further information can be found at: http://www.southampton.gov.uk/council-democracy/voting-and-elections/EuropeanParliamentaryElections/default.aspx On 9 June 2017, The Regional Returning Officer for the South East of England was notified that Annelise Dodds (Labour Party) ceased to be an MEP following her election as an MP at the UK Parliamentary Election held on 8 June 2017. The European Parliament established the resulting vacancy with effect from 9th June 2017 and as a consequence: John HOWARTH (Labour) is duly returned to serve as a Member of the European Parliament for the South East Region. http://www.southampton.gov.uk/Images/Declaration%20of%20Return%20-%20John%20Howarth%202017-06- 30_tcm63-394176.pdf .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Runmed March 2001 Bulletin
    No. 325 MARCH Bulletin 2001 RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY Challenge and Change Since the release of our Commission’s report, The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain, Runnymede has been living in interesting times. Substantial and ongoing media coverage – from the enlivening to the repellent – has fueled the debate.Though the press has focused on some issues at the expense of others, numerous events organised to broaden the discussion continue to explore the Report’s substantial content, and international interest has been awakened. At such a moment, it is a great external organisations wishing to on cultural diversity in the honour for me to be taking over the arrange events. workplace, Moving on up? Racial Michelynn Directorship of Runnymede.The 3. A National Conference to Equality and the Corporate Agenda, a Laflèche, Director of the challenges for the next three years mark the first anniversary of the Study of FTSE-100 Companies,in Runnymede Trust are a stimulus for me and our Report’s launch is being arranged for collaboration with Schneider~Ross. exceptional team, and I am facing the final quarter of 2001, in which This publication continues to be in them with enthusiasm and optimism. we will review the responses to the high demand and follow-up work to Runnymede’s work programme Report over its first year. A new that programme is now in already reflects the key issues and element will be introduced at this development for launching in 2001. recommendations raised in the stage – how to move the debate Another key programme for Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain Report, beyond the United Kingdom to the Runnymede is our coverage of for which a full dissemination level of the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • The Royal Prerogative Redefined. Parliamentary Debate on the Role
    JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 224 Teemu Häkkinen The Royal Prerogative RedeÀned Parliamentary Debate on the Role of the British Parliament in Large-scale Military Deployments, 1982–2003 JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 224 Teemu Häkkinen The Royal Prerogative Redefined Parliamentary Debate on the Role of the British Parliament in Large-scale Military Deployments, 1982–2003 Esitetään Jyväskylän yliopiston humanistisen tiedekunnan suostumuksella julkisesti tarkastettavaksi yliopiston Historica-rakennuksen salissa H320 helmikuun 1. päivänä 2014 kello 12. Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by permission of the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Jyväskylä, in building Historica, hall H320, on February 1, 2014 at 12 o’clock noon. UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ JYVÄSKYLÄ 2014 The Royal Prerogative Redefined Parliamentary Debate on the Role of the British Parliament in Large-scale Military Deployments, 1982–2003 JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 224 Teemu Häkkinen The Royal Prerogative Redefined Parliamentary Debate on the Role of the British Parliament in Large-scale Military Deployments, 1982–2003 UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ JYVÄSKYLÄ 2014 Editors Pasi Ihalainen Department of History and Ethnology, University of Jyväskylä Pekka Olsbo, Ville Korkiakangas Publishing Unit, University Library of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities Editorial Board Editor in Chief Heikki Hanka, Department of Art and Culture Studies, University of Jyväskylä Petri Karonen, Department of History and Ethnology, University of Jyväskylä Paula Kalaja, Department of Languages, University of Jyväskylä Petri Toiviainen, Department of Music, University of Jyväskylä Tarja Nikula, Centre for Applied Language Studies, University of Jyväskylä Raimo Salokangas, Department of Communication, University of Jyväskylä URN:ISBN:978-951-39-5592-2 ISBN 978-951-39-5592-2 (PDF) ISBN 978-951-39-5591-5 (nid.) ISSN 1459-4323 (nid.), 1459-4331 (PDF) Copyright © 2014, by University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä University Printing House, Jyväskylä 2014 ABSTRACT Häkkinen, Teemu The Royal Prerogative Redefined.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament Made Simple
    THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT MADE SIMPLE 2014-2019 The European Parliament Made Simple is produced by the American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union (AmCham EU) as a introduction to the workings of the European Parliament for amateurs and experts alike. Production Team Editor and project manager Giovanni Mastrobuono Senior Communications Officer Editorial assistance Alexandrine Gauvin Communications Officer Eli Corso-Phinney Communications Intern The information contained in this publication has been compiled in good faith and is accurate according to the most recent sources available at the time of going to press. Photographs used with the kind permission of the Audiovisual Libraries of the European Commission, Council of the European Union and the European Parliament. First edition, 2014 ISBN: 978-2-9146856-7-2 Printed in Belgium American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union (AmCham EU) Avenue des Arts 53, B-1000 Brussels Telephone: +32 (0)2 513 68 92 Fax: +32 (0)2 513 79 28 [email protected] www.amchameu.eu Foreword Susan Danger Managing Director American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union t is with great pleasure that I present AmCham EU’s newest guide, The European Parliament Made Simple. The Lisbon Treaty, signed in 2009, gave the European Parliament greater power in EU Idecision-making and an increased role in selecting and approving the European Commission. As a result, this year’s European election has a greater democratic influence than ever before. With this in mind, AmCham EU has published The European Parliament Made Simple to explain the Parliament’s expanded powers and roles, for both the Brussels policy community and public affairs professionals in the EU and US.
    [Show full text]
  • General Election 2015 Candidate Views on Shooting Sports & Firearms Ownership
    General Election 2015 Candidate Views on Shooting Sports & Firearms Ownership Firearms UK is an Association campaigning for the protection of firearms ownership within the UK. Primary objectives are to encourage unity and positive action within the shooting community and to promote and defend individual firearms ownership and the shooting sports. In the lead up to the 2015 General Election we canvased the parliamentary candidates for their views on shooting sports and firearms ownership. We sent an email questionnaire asking seven questions; 1. Do you believe in a total ban on private firearms ownership? 2. Do you believe that private firearms ownership should face greater restrictions? 3. Do you believe the current system is balanced/there is no need for change? 4. Do you support all forms of currently legal shooting in the UK? (If there are exceptions please state) 5. Would you oppose any moves to further restrict private firearms ownership/use in the UK? 6. Do you believe that our firearms laws are in need of reformation and sensible relaxation? 7. If you support UK citizen’s rights to participate in shooting sports do you also support changing the law to permit .22 rimfire pistols to be used for competitive shooting thus allowing ordinary UK citizens to properly train to enable them to compete in international events such as the Olympic and Commonwealth games? We obtained a database of candidate’s details from www.yournextmp.com. The database contained email addresses for 3361 of the 3969 candidates listed. Unfortunately, 183 of these email addresses were incorrect. We managed to correct some of these and sent a follow up email to the candidates.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament Elections 2009 RESEARCH PAPER 09/53 17 June 2009
    European Parliament Elections 2009 RESEARCH PAPER 09/53 17 June 2009 Elections to the European Parliament were held across the 27 states of the European Union between 4 and 7 June 2009. The UK elections were held concurrently with the county council elections in England on 4 June. The UK now has 72 MEPs, down from 78 at the last election, distributed between 12 regions. The Conservatives won 25 seats, both UKIP and Labour 13 and the Liberal Democrats 11. The Green Party held their two seats, while the BNP won their first two seats in the European parliament. Labour lost five seats compared with the comparative pre-election position. The Conservatives won the popular vote overall, and every region in Great Britain except the North East, where Labour won, and Scotland, where the SNP won. UKIP won more votes than Labour. UK turnout was 34.5%. Across Europe, centre-right parties, whether in power or opposition, tended to perform better than those on the centre-left. The exact political balance of the new Parliament depends on the formation of Groups. The UK was not alone in seeing gains for far-right and nationalistic parties. Turnout across the EU was 43%. It was particularly low in some of the newer Member States. Part 1 of this paper presents the full results of the UK elections, including regional analysis and local-level data. Part 2 presents summary results of the results across the EU, together with country-level summaries based on data from official national sources. Adam Mellows-Facer Richard Cracknell Sean Lightbown Recent Research
    [Show full text]
  • List of Delegations to the Seventieth Session of the General Assembly
    UNITED NATIONS ST /SG/SER.C/L.624 _____________________________________________________________________________ Secretariat Distr.: Limited 18 December 2015 PROTOCOL AND LIAISON SERVICE LIST OF DELEGATIONS TO THE SEVENTIETH SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY I. MEMBER STATES Page Page Afghanistan......................................................................... 5 Chile ................................................................................. 47 Albania ............................................................................... 6 China ................................................................................ 49 Algeria ................................................................................ 7 Colombia .......................................................................... 50 Andorra ............................................................................... 8 Comoros ........................................................................... 51 Angola ................................................................................ 9 Congo ............................................................................... 52 Antigua and Barbuda ........................................................ 11 Costa Rica ........................................................................ 53 Argentina .......................................................................... 12 Côte d’Ivoire .................................................................... 54 Armenia ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Sheffield Hallam University Thesis
    The Sheffield peace movement 1934-1940. STEVENSON, David Anthony Available from the Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/3916/ A Sheffield Hallam University thesis This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Please visit http://shura.shu.ac.uk/3916/ and http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html for further details about copyright and re-use permissions. REFERENCE ProQuest Number: 10701051 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 10701051 Published by ProQuest LLC(2017). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 The Sheffield Peace Movement 1934 -1940 David Anthony Stevenson A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Sheffield Hallam University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy January 2001 Abstract: The object of the thesis was to build a portrait of a local peace movement in order to contrast and compare it with existing descriptions of the peace movement written from a national perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • Tip of the Iceberg: Religious Extremist Funders Against Human Rights for Sexuality and Reproductive Health in Europe 2009 - 2018
    TIP OF THE ICEBERG Religious Extremist Funders against Human Rights for Sexuality and Reproductive Health in Europe 2009 - 2018 TIP OF THE ICEBERG Religious Extremist Funders against Human Rights for Sexuality and Reproductive Health in Europe 2009 – 2018 ISBN: 978 2 93102920 6 Tip of the Iceberg: Religious Extremist Funders against Human Rights for Sexuality and Reproductive Health in Europe 2009 - 2018 Written by Neil Datta, Secretary of the European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights. Brussels, June 2021 Copyright © EPF 2021 All Rights Reserved. The contents of this document cannot be reproduced without prior permission of the author. EPF is a network of members of parliaments from across Europe who are committed to protecting the sexual and reproductive health of the world’s most vulnerable people, both at home and overseas. We believe that women should always have the right to decide upon the number of children they wish to have, and should never be denied the education or other means to achieve this that they are entitled to. Find out more on epfweb.org and by following @EPF_SRR on Twitter. 2 TIP OF THE ICEBERG Religious Extremist Funders against Human Rights for Sexuality and Reproductive Health in Europe 2009 – 2018 Tip of the Iceberg is the first attempt understand the anti-gender mobilisation in Europe through the perspective of their funding base. This report assembles financial data covering a ten year period of over 50 anti-gender actors operating in Europe. It then takes a deeper look at how religious extremists generate this funding to roll back human rights in sexuality and reproduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservative Meps Delivering for Britain
    CONSERVATIVE MEPS DELIVERING FOR BRITAIN 446766-ECR-BROCH-MEPs.indd 1 17/09/2018 15:00 446766-ECR-BROCH-MEPs.indd 2 17/09/2018 15:00 CONTENTS PAGE • Introduction by Syed Kamall MEP and Ashley Fox MEP 4 • Delivering Brexit 6 • Keeping Europe Safe 7 • Backing Business, Cutting Red Tape and Boosting Jobs 9 • Transport 11 • Delivering for Consumers 12 • Delivering for Farmers 14 • Delivering for Fishermen 15 • Protecting the Environment 16 • Improving Animal Welfare 18 • Promoting Britain Abroad 20 • Championing Free Trade 21 • Foreign Affairs 23 • Development 26 • ECR Group & Conservative Friends of the ECR 27 • A Better Europe 28 • Conservative MEPs 2014 - 2018 30 • Reports Authored By Conservative MEPs 2014 - 2018 31 3 446766-ECR-BROCH-MEPs.indd 3 17/09/2018 15:00 INTRODUCTION BY SYED KAMALL MEP CO-CHAIRMAN OF THE EUROPEAN CONSERVATIVES AND REFORMISTS GROUP In 2006 British Prime Minister David Cameron and his Czech counterpart Mirek Topolanek formed the Movement for European Reform to promote the idea of an open, flexible and non-federalist Europe. They were soon joined by Poland’s Law and Justice Party and, following the European elections in June 2009, the European Conservatives and Reformists Group was born. It pledged to challenge the status quo in the European Parliament, where deals were often struck by a handful of party leaders behind closed doors. Not surprisingly our political opponents tried to block us, predicting that the ECR could not last. They were wrong. To the surprise and chagrin of many in Brussels, we emerged from the 2014 elections as the Parliament’s third largest group with 70 MEPs from 15 different member states and myself as chairman.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cotonou Agreement Between the European Union and ACP States and the End of the Lomé Convention
    Third World Quarterly, Vol 24, No 1, pp 161–176, 2003 Co-operation and coercion? The Cotonou Agreement between the European Union and ACP states and the end of the Lomé Convention STEPHEN R HURT ABSTRACT The Cotonou Agreement, signed on 23 June 2000, defines the new relationship between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states. It was the result of 18 months of negotiations to decide the future of EU–ACP relations after the Lomé Convention’s expiry on 29 February 2000. This article highlights the significant changes represented by the Cotonou Agreement and emphasises some of the dangers that may result for the ACP states. In doing so, the article adopts a neo-Gramscian perspective showing how the nature of the new EU–ACP agreement has significantly shifted the relationship further from one of co-operation to one of coercion. The new approach taken by the EU can be understood within the context of the hegemonic dominance of neoliberalism within political elites. This is most explicitly demonstrated by the EU’s major justification for the proposed changes: the need to comply with the core principles and rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The European Union (EU) has a long history of development co-operation with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states.1 It is a key area within EU external relations and makes Europe a significant actor within the wider realm of North–South relations. The EU is now a major aid provider and the ACP states are heavily reliant on EU markets for their exports.
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 European Election Results for London
    2009 European election results for London Data Management and Analysis Group 2009 European election results for London DMAG Briefing 2009-07 July 2009 Gareth Piggott ISSN 1479-7879 DMAG Briefing 2009-07 1 2009 European election results for London DMAG Briefing 2009-07 July 2009 2009 European election results for London For more information please contact: Gareth Piggott Data Management and Analysis Group Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk London SE1 2AA Tel: 020 7983 4327 e-mail: [email protected] Copyright © Greater London Authority, 2009 Source of all data: Regional Returning Officers All maps are © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. (Greater London Authority) (LA100032379) (2009) Data can be made available in other formats on request In some charts in this report colours that are associated with political parties are used. Printing in black and white, can make those charts hard to read. ISSN 1479-7879 This briefing is printed on at least 70 per cent recycled paper. The paper is suitable for recycling. 2 DMAG Briefing 2009-07 2009 European election results for London List of tables, charts and maps Page Turnout Map 1 Turnout 2009, by borough 5 Map 2 Change in turnout 2004-2009, by borough 5 Result Table 3 Summary of election results 1999-2009, London 5 Table 4 Order of winning seats, London 2009 6 Figure 5 Shares of votes, 2009, London and UK 7 Figure 6 Share of vote for main parties by UK region, 2009 8 London voting trends 1999-2009 Figure 7 Share of votes for main parties, UK 1999 to 2009 8 Figure 8
    [Show full text]
  • Nirj Deva 20 Bendt Bendtsen 22 Paul Rübig
    Whose representatives? MEPs on the industry payroll Whose representatives? 1 Whose representatives? MEPs on the industry payroll Table of contents 4 Introduction 5 Class of 2014 - 2019: Overview 6 More questions than answers 7 DoFIs revealing potential conflicts of interest 7 Michał Boni 9 Renato Soru 11 Birgit Collin-Langen 12 Guy Verhofstadt 14 Dariusz Rosati 16 New Parliament, old problems 17 Rachida Dati 18 Nirj Deva 20 Bendt Bendtsen 22 Paul Rübig 24 Conclusion and recommendations 25 Endnotes 31 Credits Whose representatives? 3 Introduction In this report we focus on nine Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) whose side jobs or outside interests, in our view, give rise to concerns over potential conflicts of interest. Pursuant to Article 3 of the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament with respect to financial interests and con- flicts of interest, “A conflict of interest exists where a Member of the European Parliament has a personal interest that could improperly influence the performance of his or her duties as a Member.”1 We express the belief that any MEP in the pay of commercial organisations directly or indirectly involved in influenc- ing EU decision making, at the best will not be perceived as maintaining “disinterest” (“disinterest” being one of the Guiding Principles in Article 1 of the Code) and at worst may actually come under commercial influence. In this report we highlight the risk of actual or perceived conflicts of interest developing and call for changes to the Code including a complete ban on side jobs with companies or groups involved in EU lobbying.
    [Show full text]