DOCSLIB.ORG

The Post Referendum Chronology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Post Referendum Chronology The Post Referendum Chronology (1) March 2017, at the American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC) awards, held at Huntington Beach CA, Goddard Gunster win the ‘International Consultant of the Year Award’ for their work with LeaveEU and Nigel Farage. Farage gives the award acceptance speech. (2) April 2017, the Electoral Commission announce an investigation into the activities of LeaveEU during the 2016 EU referendum. (3) May 2017, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) announces investigations into the political use of private data amid concerns over allegations involving an analytics firm linked to a Brexit campaign. (4) September 2017, with the Electoral Commission refusing to investigate Vote Leave, they receive a ‘letter before claim’ from the ‘Good Law Project’ outlining their failure to take any action relating to expenditure of more than £620,000 on services provided by a company called Aggregate IQ, further to the same sum being passed from the designated lead campaigning organisation “Vote Leave” to Mr Darren Grimes, a registered campaigner for the referendum. (5) October 2017, the Good Law Project issue proceedings challenging the conclusions reached by the Electoral Commission over the spending return of Vote Leave, Mr. Darren Grimes and BeLeave. Shortly afterwards, the Commission agree to re-open its investigation into the relevant transactions. (6) November 2017, the Electoral Commission, having previously declined to investigate Vote Leave on two occasions, citing a lack of evidence, announce an investigation into Vote Leave, Mr. Darren Grimes, BeLeave and Veterans for Britain. (7) January 2018, Vote Leave’s lawyers send a ‘Pre-Action Protocol Letter’ indicating that it intended to judicially review the opening of the investigation; but given more details on the decision to investigate, they take no further action. (8) May 2018, the Electoral Commission announce the result of their investigation into LeaveEU. They find LeaveEU guilty of multiple breaches of electoral laws included in the ‘EU Referendum Act 2015’ and the ‘Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000’ (PPERA) and fine them a total of £70,000. 1 (9) July 2018, the Electoral Commission announce the result of their investigation into Vote Leave, Mr. Darren Grimes, BeLeave and Veterans for Britain. They find Vote Leave guilty of multiple breaches of PPERA and fine them £61,000. Mr. Darren Grimes is fined £20,000 for an offence under section 117(3) PPERA and BeLeave committed an offence under section 117(4) PPERA. Mr. Darren Grimes is also guilty of an offence under section 117(3) PPERA but in light of the £20,000 fine the Electoral Commission decided not to impose a further fine. Veterans for Britain committed an offence under section 122(4)(b) PPERA and is fined £250. (10) August 2018, the Electoral Commission decline to investigate the political party which props up the May government, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), over claims it coordinated its Brexit referendum campaign spending with Vote Leave in order to break legal spending limits. The Commission later disclose that even if it had found sufficient evidence of Vote Leave coordinating with the DUP, they decide that there would be no public interest in investigating the matter because Vote Leave had already been found to have coordinated with Mr. Darren Grimes. (11) September 2018, the Electoral Commission lose a High Court legal challenge, from the Good Law Project, that argued the Commission failed in its duty to regulate the 2016 referendum. MR. Justice Leggatt ruled that the Commission had misunderstood the definition of ‘referendum expenses’ and, as a result of this misinterpretation, issued the wrong advice to Vote Leave in relation to £620,000 which Vote Leave sent, on behalf of Mr. Darren Grimes’ organisation, BeLeave, to a Canadian digital campaign company, AggregateIQ. a) As a result of this ruling, Vote Leave claim, repeated by most media outlets, that this was the true reason for the massive discrepancy in their spending return and not that they had deliberately set out to circumvent strict spending regulations as the Electoral Commission had claimed. b) Vote Leave Chief Executive, Matthew Elliott said at the time, “Vote Leave’s decision to give money to BeLeave rested on the advice we sought and were given from the Electoral Commission. We followed that advice, yet we were told that, by having followed that advice, we broke the law…the High Court has now ruled that this advice was wrong…today’s judgement effectively makes the Electoral Commission’s recent decision on Vote Leave redundant.” – see paragraph 24. 2 (12) November 2018, Shahmir Sanni, a Vote Leave / BeLeave whistleblower, wins his employment tribunal for wrongful dismissal against Tufton St entity, The Taxpayer’s Alliance (TPA). The TPA was founded by Matthew Elliott, Vote Leave’s Chief Executive. Mr. Sanni worked for the TPA following the 2016 EU referendum. By admitting to illegally sacking Mr. Sanni, the TPA were excused from disclosing communications between nine Tufton St entities - The TaxPayers’ Alliance, The office of Peter Whittle, former leader of the UK Independence Party, Civitas: Institute for the Study of Civil Society Europe, The Adam Smith Institute, Leave Means Leave, The Global Warming Policy Foundation, Brexit Central, The Centre for Policy Studies and The Institute for Economic Affairs - all of whom, according to the evidence provided by Mr. Sanni, attended regular co- ordination meetings during the 2016 EU referendum as part of their political campaigning. (13) November 2018, Vote Leave and BeLeave lose a High Court Judicial Review aimed at getting the findings of the Electoral Commission overruled, they argue that the Electoral Commission did not have the authority to publish their findings. The judgment by Mrs Justice Yip declared: “I do not consider that the claimant’s grounds are arguable”. (14) February 2019, LeaveEU and Eldon Insurance, owned by its founder Arron Banks, are fined £120,000 over data law breaches. The fines followed an Information Commissioner investigation into the misuse of personal data by political campaigns. The ICO investigation found that more than a million emails sent to LeaveEU subscribers contained marketing for the Eldon Insurance firm’s GoSkippy services. Eldon Insurance were also fined £60,000 for the breach. UK Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham said: “It is deeply concerning that sensitive personal data, gathered for political purposes, was later used for insurance purposes and vice versa.” (15) February 2019, following an earlier December 2018 decision in the High Court, in which the judge ruled their case was out of time and lacked merit, Wilson and Others v The Prime Minister lose their appeal for a judicial review of the 2016 referendum, specifically the legal validity of the PMs decision and A50 notification (based solely on the outcome of the referendum as the mandate) which the appellant claimed was impaired by the unlawful referendum campaign, as per the Electoral Commission findings in May and July 2018. (16) March 2019, the Central London County Court uphold the decision of the Electoral Commission to fine LeaveEU for four offences during the 2015 EU 3 referendum; aspects of LeaveEU’s appeal were allowed, namely that their £247,000 spend with political consultant ‘Goddard Gunster’ was not reportable as the judge found this was ‘political strategic advice’ to Mr. Arron Banks personally and as such was not a reportable expense under schedule 13 of PPERA. LeaveEU’s fine of £70,000 was reduced by £4,000 to £66,000. a) Additionally, with regard to the £8m total, £6m + £2m, funding provided by Mr. Arron Banks, LeaveEU reported that “The loan agreement, to the LeaveEU campaign, was confirmed by the judge as being from Arron Banks and Rock Services was not a party to it.” (17) March 2019, the UK privacy watchdog, the Information Commissioners Office, fine Vote Leave £40,000 for sending 196,154 unsolicited text messages during the EU referendum campaign. (18) March 2019, Vote Leave withdraw their appeal against the Electoral Commission, paying fines and costs totalling £241,000. (19) March 2019, Dominic Cummings, campaign director for Vote Leave, is found in contempt of parliament by ‘The House of Commons Committee of Privileges’ who said, “Cummings’ refusal to give oral evidence to MPs constituted a significant interference in the work of the inquiry.” (20) May 2019, at the London Assembly, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Cressida Dick, confirms on camera, that, after twelve months, ‘assessments, not investigations’, of the evidence against LeaveEU and Vote Leave were coming to an end and a decision on whether to proceed to the investigation phase should be made in weeks, not months. (21) July 2019, Mr. Darren Grimes wins an appeal, at the Central London County Court, against the Electoral Commission, with the judge ruling that the £20,000 fine be rescinded, adding that even if Mr. Grimes had committed an offence it would not have justified the maximum fine of £20,000. (22) August 2019, the Metropolitan Police send a file on LeaveEU to the CPS for ‘early investigative advice’. In May 2018, the Electoral Commission had referred the responsible person at LeaveEU to the police because they were required, by law, to submit a complete and correct referendum return. It is an offence for that person to knowingly or recklessly make a false declaration. Civil sanctions do not attach to this offence; it can only be pursued via a criminal prosecution. 4 (23) September 2019, the Metropolitan Police, following the ‘early investigative advice’ from the CPS, conclude that, ‘whilst some technical breaches of electoral law were committed, there is insufficient evidence to justify any further criminal investigation into LeaveEU and cite that the Electoral Commission’s report into LeaveEU’s spending return should be read in conjunction with the County Court Judgment on 21st March 2019 (see paragraph 10) between LeaveEU Group Ltd and the Electoral Commission.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Expert Says Brexit Campaign Used Data Mined from Facebook 27 March 2018, by Danica Kirka
    Expert says Brexit campaign used data mined from Facebook 27 March 2018, by Danica Kirka persuade voters. "It was everywhere." Among the companies that had access to the data was AggregateIQ, a Canadian political consultant that did work for Vote Leave, the official campaign backing Britain's withdrawal from the EU, Wylie said. Wylie described Cambridge Analytica as just one arm of a global company, SCL Group, that gets most of its income from military contracts but is also a political gun-for-hire, often in countries where democratic institutions are weak. He suggested the company combines computer algorithms and dirty tricks to help candidates win regardless of the cost. Whistleblower Christopher Wylie who alleges that the The 28-year-old Canadian with a swath of pink hair campaign for Britain to leave the EU cheated in the referendum in 2016, speaking at a lawyers office to the says he helped set up Cambridge Analytica in media in London, Monday, March 26, 2018. Chris 2013. He left the next year. Wylie's claims center around the official Vote Leave campaign and its links to a group called BeLeave, which Wylie has previously alleged that Cambridge it helped fund. The links allegedly allowed the campaign Analytica used personal data improperly collected to bypass spending rules. (AP Photo/Alastair Grant) from Facebook users to help Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. Cambridge Analytica says none of the Facebook The computer expert who alleges a trove of data was used in its work on the Trump campaign. Facebook data was improperly used to help It denies any wrongdoing.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of an Investigation in Respect Of
    Report of an investigation in respect of - Vote Leave Limited - Mr Darren Grimes - BeLeave - Veterans for Britain Concerning campaign funding and spending for the 2016 referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU 17 July 2018 1 Other formats For information on obtaining this publication in a large-print or Braille version, please contact the Electoral Commission. Tel: 020 7271 0500 Email: [email protected] The Electoral Commission is the independent body which oversees elections and regulates political finance in the UK. We work to promote public confidence in the democratic process and ensure its integrity. 2 Contents 1 Introduction..................................................................................................... 4 2 The decision to investigate ............................................................................. 9 3 The investigation .......................................................................................... 12 4 The investigation findings ............................................................................. 16 Joint spending by Vote Leave and BeLeave ................................................... 16 Vote Leave’s spending limit ............................................................................. 21 Other issues with Vote Leave’s spending return ............................................. 24 BeLeave’s spending ........................................................................................ 25 Mr Grimes’ spending return ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 17 July 2018 - - Page 1 of 38 - (I) Causing Or Permitting a Derogatory Article to Be Written in Brexit Central; And
    IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL CASE NUMBER: [TBC] B E T W E E N: SHAHMIR SANNI (Claimant) -and- THE TAX PAYERS ALLIANCE LIMITED (Respondent) PARTICULARS OF CLAIM Parties (1) The Claimant was employed by the Respondent from 13 March 2017 to 13 April 2018. He was employed as a Digital Campaign Manager. His responsibilities included running the Respondent’s social media accounts, YouTube channel, and producing website content and video content. (2) The Respondent is a self-declared “grassroots campaigning group dedicated to reforming taxes, cutting spending and protecting taxpayers”. It is a lobbying group pursuing a right-wing political ideology. It operates from 55 Tufton Street, Westminster, an office block where seven other similar right-wing political organisations are based. (3) The Claimant was summarily dismissed by the Respondent on 13 April 2018. Legal Claims (4) The Claimant advances claims of: (a) Automatically Unfair Dismissal by reason of having made a protected disclosure (s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996 (“ERA”)); (b) Directly discriminatory dismissal (s.13 and s.39(2)(c) Equality Act 2010 (“EqA 2010”) because of his belief that protecting the integrity and sanctity of British democracy from taint and corruption was paramount, which is a philosophical belief protected by s.10 EqA 2010 and in accordance with the characteristics set out in Grainger v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360; (c) Protected Disclosure detriment (s.47B ERA), namely:- _________________________ - Particulars of Claim - - 17 July 2018 - - Page 1 of 38 - (i) Causing or permitting a derogatory article to be written in Brexit Central; and (ii) Instructing Wilsons LLP to write the letter wrongly threatening defamation proceedings; and (iii) Permitting or causing the making of derogatory statements in public and the media on 4 July 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit: Where Is the EU–UK Relationship Heading?
    Simon Hix Brexit: where is the EU–UK relationship heading? Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Hix, Simon (2018) Brexit: where is the EU–UK relationship heading? Journal of Common Market Studies. ISSN 0021-9886 (In Press) DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12766 © 2018 University Association for Contemporary European Studies and John Wiley & Sons Ltd This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/89976/ Available in LSE Research Online: August 2018 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. The JCMS Annual Review Lecture 2018 Brexit: Where is the EU-UK Relationship Heading?1 Simon Hix London School of Economics and Political Science 1 I would like to thank Angus Armstrong, Catherine Barnard, Theofanis Exadaktylos, Anand Menon, Jonathan Portes, Brendan O’Leary and Simon Usherwood for their helpful comments on an earlier version.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit Jargon Buster
    Brexit Jargon Buster Brexit Jargon Buster • 1 2 • Brexit Jargon Buster AAgencies European Union agencies regulate a number of regimes for goods and services; the European Chemicals Agency in Helsinki regulates chemicals and biocides; the European Medicines Agency, formerly in London is now relocated in Amsterdam responsible for the scientific evaluation, supervision and safety monitoring of medicines in the EU; the European Aviation Safety Agency. AIFMD The Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive. This EU Directive regulates the managers (AIFMs) of alternative investment funds (AIFs). AIFMD includes passporting rights (see separate definition) for EU AIFMs to market funds across the EU. The Directive also contains provisions allowing non-EU AIFMs to become part of the passporting regime by way of a ‘third country passport’ (see separate definition) which may, in the future, provide a means for UK AIFMs to retain passporting rights post-Brexit. Competition law Competition laws of the EU are set out in the TFEU. They are a very important aspect of the single market. The European Commission is tasked with developing policy and enforcing the law ensuring that the European Union remains free from business practices that could ultimately be harmful to competition and consumers. In doing so, the Commission works with national competition authorities which are obliged also to apply EU competition law as well as domestic law. Particular emphasis is placed on ensuring businesses do not enter into anti-competitive agreements or abuse dominant positions in markets; the consequences of doing so can be severe. Brexit Jargon Buster • 3 The European Commission also assesses very large mergers and state aid.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Leave Vote
    Understanding the Leave vote Author: Kirby Swales Acknowledgements: Thank you to the following people who assisted in the production of this report: Allison Dunatchik, Anne Summers, Curtis Jessop, Ian Simpson, John Curtice, Leigh Marshall, Martin Wood, Matt Jonas and Sean Willmott. With thanks also to UK and a Changing Europe and ESRC for funding this project. NatCen Social Research 35 Northampton Square London EC1V 0AX Tel. 020 7250 1866 Fax. 020 7250 1524 E-mail: [email protected] www.natcen.ac.uk Cover photo: BTN/LMUG photowalk. 2012. © Flickr/Betsy Weber Contents 1 Summary 2 2 Introduction 3 Data sources 3 3 Background 4 The rise of Euroscepticism 4 What tipped the balance? 5 4 The demographics of the vote 7 Objective characteristics 7 Subjective characteristics 7 5 The policy issues at stake 13 Which issues were most important in the Referendum? 13 Did views on the EU vote match wider policy concerns? 14 The EU vote in the context of general political attitudes 15 6 The politics of the vote 19 The role of ‘new’ voters 19 Understanding turnout 19 How did political allegiance influence the vote? 20 Did the public know where MPs stood? 21 7 Segmenting the population 25 8 Conclusions 27 Notes and references 28 NatCen Social Research: Understanding the Leave vote 1 1 Summary Identity politics played a role The Leave victory was not about objective demographics alone. Matters of identity were equally, if not more strongly, associated with the Leave vote – particularly feelings of national identity and sense of change over time. Voters not persuaded by arguments about economic risks The Leave campaign resonated more strongly with the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Post Layout 1
    Friday 15 International Friday, July 26, 2019 Britain new leader rejects ‘unacceptable’ Brexit deal Johnson urged EU leaders to rethink their opposition LONDON: Britain’s new Prime Minister Boris ing the EU after 46 years without an agreement will Johnson yesterday called the current Brexit deal be less painful than economists warn. The markets negotiated with the EU “unacceptable” and set were relieved by the appointment of former preparations for leaving the bloc without an agree- Deutsche Bank Sajid Javid as finance chief. The ment as a “top priority” for the government. In a pound held steady against the dollar and euro as pugnacious debut in parliament, the former London traders waited for Johnson’s first policy moves. mayor urged EU leaders to rethink their opposition Other appointments were more divisive. Brexit to renegotiating the deal. hardliner Dominic Raab became foreign secretary After installing a right-wing government follow- and Jacob Rees-Mogg - leader of a right-wing ing a radical overhaul, Johnson doubled down on faction of Conservatives who helped bring about his promise to lead Britain out of the EU by Octo- May’s demise - as the government’s parliament ber 31 at any cost. In case of a no-deal exit, he also representative. New interior minister Priti Patel threatened to withhold the £39 billion ($49 billion) has previously expressed support for the death divorce bill that Britain has previously said it owes penalty and voted against same-sex marriage. The the EU and instead spend the money for prepara- Labor opposition-backing Mirror newspaper tions for leaving with no agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • Reflections on Brexit and Its Implications for Ireland John Bruton
    No 2017/16, May 2017 Reflections on Brexit and its Implications for Ireland John Bruton Summary This paper presents the testimony delivered by John Bruton, former Prime Minister of Ireland, on 27 April 2017, before the Seanad Special Committee on the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. The Special Committee was established by the Seanad on February 27th to consider the implications of Brexit for Ireland. Mr Bruton began his testimony by commending the committee for its work and also the government for ensuring, through effective diplomacy, that the particular problems of Ireland have been publicly recognised in the negotiating positions of both the EU 27 and the UK. Contents What is the alternative to a hard Brexit? ............................................................................................................ 1 How will the EU respond to Mrs May’s letter?.................................................................................................... 1 Should the EU offer UK voters another option? .................................................................................................. 2 The EU negotiating position ............................................................................................................................... 4 The state of British knowledge of the EU and its impact on the negotiations ....................................................... 5 Some of the practical problems of Brexit...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • FY19 FOIA Fincen Internal
    DATE REQUEST ID SUMMARY OF REQUEST REQUESTER GoFOIA # RECEIVED Marijuana related Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) The records I am asking you to produce will indicate by Industry Type, Year and Month of filing, States/Territories, and Regulator (all available at https://www fincen gov/reports/sar-stats); and by type of marijuana-related SAR (“Marijuana Limited”, “Marijuana Priority”, and Marijuana Termination”): 19-001-F 10/1/2018 Richards, Jim 2018-10-013 1 the number of financial institutions filing marijuana-related SARs, 2 the number of marijuana-related SARs filed by each financial institution, without naming the institution; 3 the number of suspects listed in each SAR 19-002-F All “Marijuana Limited” SARs filed during Quarter 1 of 2018 10/3/18 Repanich, Tony 2018-08-079 19-003-F FOIA Log for FY18 10/5/18 Kaplan, Thomas 2018-10-044 I am seeking the responsive records for the following FOIA requests to FinCEN (as identified by request number or request ID in your FOIA logs): 19-004-F 10/5/18 Kaplan, Thomas 2018-10-043 2016-01-140, 17-007-F, 17-133-F, 17-172-F, 17-173-F, 17-175-F, 17-245-F, 17-384-F 19-005-F Records pertaining to self 10/9/18 b(6) 2018-10-048 FOIA Log from July 1, 2018 to present, Copy of the Director's daily calendar from July 1, 2018 to present, a copy of all visitor logs from July 1, 2018 to present, and any and all communications, to include but not be limited to official correspondence on congressional letterhead as well as emails sent from the following members of Congress or their staffs, 19-006-F 10/11/2018
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Economy of Brexit and the UK's National Business Model
    SPERI Paper No. 41 The Political Economy of Brexit and the UK’s National Business Model. Edited by Scott Lavery, Lucia Quaglia and Charlie Dannreuther About SPERI The Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute (SPERI) at the University of Sheffield brings together leading international researchers, policy-makers, journalists and opinion formers to develop new ways of thinking about the economic and political challenges by the current combination of financial crisis, shifting economic power and environmental threat. SPERI’s goal is to shape and lead the debate on how to build a sustainable recovery and a sustainable political economy for the long-term. ISSN 2052-000X Published in May 2017 SPERI Paper No. 41 – The Political Economy of Brexit and the UK’s National Business Model 1 Content Author details 2 Introduction 4 Scott Lavery, Lucia Quaglia and Charlie Dannreuther The political economy of finance in the UK and Brexit 6 Scott James and Lucia Quaglia Taking back control? The discursive constraints on post-Brexit 11 trade policy Gabriel Siles-Brügge Paying Our Way in the World? Visible and Invisible Dangers of 17 Brexit Jonathan Perraton Brexit Aesthetic and the politics of infrastructure investment 24 Charlie Dannreuther What’s left for ‘Social Europe’? Regulating transnational la- 33 bour markets in the UK-1 and the EU-27 after Brexit Nicole Lindstrom Will Brexit deepen the UK’s ‘North-South’ divide? 40 Scott Lavery Putting the EU’s crises into perspective 46 Ben Rosamond SPERI Paper No. 41 – The Political Economy of Brexit and the UK’s National Business Model 2 Authors Scott Lavery is a Research Fellow at the Sheffield Political Economy Research In- stitute (SPERI) at the University of Sheffield.
    [Show full text]
  • Disinformation and 'Fake News': Interim Report
    House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee Disinformation and ‘fake news’: Interim Report Fifth Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 24 July 2018 HC 363 Published on 29 July 2018 by authority of the House of Commons The Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee The Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Damian Collins MP (Conservative, Folkestone and Hythe) (Chair) Clive Efford MP (Labour, Eltham) Julie Elliott MP (Labour, Sunderland Central) Paul Farrelly MP (Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme) Simon Hart MP (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire) Julian Knight MP (Conservative, Solihull) Ian C. Lucas MP (Labour, Wrexham) Brendan O’Hara MP (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute) Rebecca Pow MP (Conservative, Taunton Deane) Jo Stevens MP (Labour, Cardiff Central) Giles Watling MP (Conservative, Clacton) The following Members were also members of the Committee during the inquiry Christian Matheson MP (Labour, City of Chester) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/dcmscom and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the COUNTY COURT at CENTRAL LONDON Claim No. E40CL216 in the MATTER of the POLITICAL PARTIES, ELECTIONS and REFERENDUMS ACT 2
    IN THE COUNTY COURT AT CENTRAL LONDON Claim No. E40CL216 IN THE MATTER OF THE POLITICAL PARTIES, ELECTIONS AND REFERENDUMS ACT 2000; AND THE POLITICAL PARTIES, ELECTIONS AND REFERENDUMS (CIVIL SANCTIONS) ORDER 2010 BEFORE HHJ DIGHT CBE B E T W E E N: DARREN GRIMES Appellant -and- THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION Respondent _____________________________ NOTICE OF RESPONSE _____________________________ INTRODUCTION 1. The Commission is the independent body which oversees elections and regulates political finance in the UK. It is a body corporate established by statute which consists of nine or ten members, known as Electoral Commissioners and appointed by the Queen, who also appoints one of the Commissioners to be the chairman of the Commission: see ss.1(1)-(5) PPERA. Mr Grimes is an individual who registered as a permitted participant in the 2016 EU referendum. 2. This appeal concerns the decision contained in the Commission’s Statutory Notice dated 16 July 2018 and issued on 17 July 2018 (“the Notice”). In the Notice, the Commission concluded that Mr Grimes had committed offences in connection with four payments made in June 2016 to a Canadian data analytics firm called Aggregate IQ (“AIQ”) for services provided to campaigners in the EU referendum; and had thereby acted in breach of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (“PPERA”). The Commission concluded that the offences were serious and imposed civil sanctions accordingly. On the same date, the Commission published a report of its investigation into the Appellant (amongst others) concerning campaign funding and spending for the EU referendum (the “Report”). The Appellant now appeals against the Notice pursuant to §6(6) of Schedule 19C PPERA.
    [Show full text]