But politics, per se, is a fraud

Graeme Archer, Daily Telegraph, writes posing the question since when did Britain become a country that tolerates voting fraud. This article is no doubt prompted by a series that Andrew Gilligan (here and here) has been running about what appears to be a highly organised, illegal, activity in Tower Hamlets.

This is not a new phenomenon – remember, only two days before the last general election the Mail was alleging potential voter fraud in Tower Hamlets, Bethnal Green, Bradford, Calderdale, Derby and Surrey. So what has been happening to those police investigations? What have the Electoral Commission been doing for the last two years? Only now do we find that, as reported in the Evening Standard, the Electoral Commission have written to the police following their receiving a letter signed by 6 Labour councillors. If the Electoral Commission are aware of instances where postal votes have been cast by people who no longer live within a ward or constituency, why is it only now that they have decided to write to the police?

The manipulation of the postal voting system is but only one aspect of fraud when considering our political system.  Yesterday I posted on the fact that at the last general election every Conservative candidate committed a form of fraud by campaigning on a manifesto which contained a promise that their party knew full well could not be achieved. Even our politicians are frauds; witness Jeff Randall’s article from 2005 to which Richard North links today in a post which refers to another ‘Cameron Big-up’ article by Charles Moore in his usual op-ed Saturday Daily Telegraph slot. If even a van load of Viagra would fail to make a politician thrilling; if a politician has the mien of a middle manager, promoted beyond his pay grade; if a politician has something faintly louche about him to the extent that an observer feels he could not trust said politician with his daughter’s pocket money, then what the hell are they doing in positions where their power knows little limit?

Another fraud perpetrated on the British electorate are political manifestos, documents full of statements – all of which are ‘loosely’ worded – some of which may or may not be actioned and which bear hardly any relation to that which an incoming government does. In fact a quotation, reportedly by Michael Heseltine, shows how a politician views party manifestos:

“I keep telling my Tory colleagues: don’t have any policies. A manifesto that has policies alienates people. In 1979 the manifesto said nothing which was brilliant.”

Can it not be considered fraudulent of the Cabinet Office to refuse to disclose details of how many hours Sir Alex Allan, Cameron’s anti-sleaze advisor, works or what he had been doing since his appointment – especially when his salary is paid from public funds? Where the governance of this country is concerned, is it not fraudulent for someone in a non-job, one that no longer holds any degree of dignity, the point of that job which is not clear, to accuse another of exactly the same?

Is it not a fraud when politicians promote a form of democracy known as representative democracy when that system is anything but, resulting in no more than an elective dictatorship? Is it not a fraud when a government – one not elected but contrived by politicians for the exercise of personal power – produces a programme for government in which, for example, it promises the electorate recall of their MP but ‘conditions’ that promise by insisting that the final decision rests with their own political class? Is it not a fraud whereby politicians use the title Rt. Honourable and Honourable when that title, which encompasses the need for principles and a sense of morality, is abused as a result of those using it having no principles, nor morality?

Our politicians continually advise us that change is required, that we cannot continue as we are – and boy, are they right. They do, however, have a large problem looming on their horizon in that the change that will hopefully be forthcoming is one that they most certainly are not going to like – and it couldn’t happen to a nicer (not) group of people!

 Afterthought: Is it also not a fraud for people to present themselves as politicians when they are but college kids?


10 Responses

  1. Peter C says:

    I expect all here agree that the entire political process in Europe and the UK in particular is fraudulent.

    As to prosecutions, I can only recall a single incidence of a successful prosecution, that of a Tory grouping trying to finagle the election of another party member in the Bradford local elections in, I believe, 2005. It would make for an interesting FOI to see just how many prosecutions there have been given that it is considered endemic in some areas.

    Of course the majority of it seems to take place within the Muslim community and while there are apparently cases of harvesting and identity fraud, very obviously illegal, most seems to involve the patriarch either instructing other family members who to vote for or passing signed but otherwise clear ballots to Imams or community elders to complete. Since this kind of thing is the cultural norm in these communities it is, I suppose, not surprising that few prosecutions seem to actually happen.

    • TomTom says:

      “the majority of it seems to take place within the Muslim community”

      Maybe, but those voters – especially women – are being traduced by ALL parties. Conservatives, LibDems, and Labour have been caught at it….the other trick if for ALL parties to put up candidates called “Hussain” to capture family bidari voters.

      The Manifestoes of ALL parties is different in Urdu from the English version. It should be illegal to issue any public document in a foreign language without certified English translation

    • david says:

      “Since this kind of thing is the cultural norm in these communities it is, I suppose, not surprising that few prosecutions seem to actually happen.”

      Is it not about time that these people were informed that whilst they may do that in their own country, they are not living in their own country, but ours, and they will do as we say or get out?

      Oh wait – just remembered this multiculturalism thingy. Never ceases to amaze me how I can so easily forget crap!

  2. david says:

    I also seem to recall a Labour politician (non-white) also being found guilty of this (somewhere in the Midlands or up North – must google)

    Re the few prosecutions: probably due to a fear that it might infringe their human and cultural rights……

  3. Ian says:

    I am convinced that Prescott only changed the postal voting rules so that Labour could benefit from electoral fraud.

  4. TomTom says:

    Postal Voting

    Compulsory postal voting is a shameful exercise in electoral manipulation

    The local elections scheduled for May 2004 were postponed to June and combined with the European Parliament elections. The UK government used this opportunity to trial all-postal voting in these elections across four regions: North East, North West, East Midlands, and Yorkshire and the Humber.

  5. John says:

    I recall “homes for votes” scandal in the late 80’s…..


    Another strategy is to permanently move people into an electorate, usually through public housing. If people eligible for public housing are likely to vote for a particular party, then they can either be concentrated into one electorate, thus making their votes count for less, or moved into marginal electorates, where they may tip the balance towards their preferred party. One notable example of this occurred in the City of Westminster under Shirley Porter.[7] In this case the electoral fraud relied on gaming the United Kingdom’s first past the post electoral system, as in such a system it does not matter how much a party wins or loses by. The fraudsters calculated which wards they had no hope of winning, which they were almost sure of winning and which wards were marginal. By manipulating Westminster Council’s public housing stock, the fraudsters were able to move voters more likely to vote for their electoral rivals from marginal wards to the wards that they were going to lose anyway”


    What was it…a 37 million pound fine ?


    The postal vote may well be corruption, or it may be a genuine attempt to get people to vote who do not want to go out and vote.
    And it obviously has been corrupted by some.
    And what of the forthcoming boundary changes ?
    Will they also be, via crony-ism, another attempt to “rig the vote” ?
    My bet is always going to be on “crony-ism”

Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012