Wednesday, 2 February 2011

Election Fraud report still secret

A week on from the promised release date of 26th January and the Electoral Commission's report on election fraud at the 2010 election remains secret. Why? They're not saying. 


Meanwhile, further evidence that the UK's third-world standards of electoral probity, so valued by the corrupt Labour Party, comes from evidence that 28% of candidates at the last election thought voting was unsafe from fraud and abuse, and 24% of candidates and agents were concerned about electoral fraud and abuse in their constituencies. Fraud has rocketed since the introduction of postal voting on demand, and is concentrated in Labour areas, frequently amongst Labour's client immigrant populations. Our primitive standards of voter registration have left us, by Michael Pinto-Duschinsky's estimation, with 3.5m people on the roll who shouldn't be and another 3.5m missing from the roll who should be. 


Add electoral fraud to the scandal of Labour's rotten boroughs and despair at what this nation, once the mother of democracy, has sunk to. Can we get any lower?

4 comments:

Robert said...

The sad thing about this and your previous post is that this has been known about for years and that nothing has been, or wil be done about it.

The biggest block to political reform in this country is the party machine which always elects its own. The mainstream media is useless. Thank god for bloggers.

Woodsy42 said...

Surely it's not just the discrepancy in voter numbers, it's also the problem that a postal vote is not necessarily private and confidential, it is easily open to coercion within the household.

Don Cox said...

Yes, we can get much lower, and we probably will.

English Pensioner said...

I had a young Asian colleague at work who'd just got the vote about the same time that postal voting was introduced. Although he didn't live at home, his father registered him there for a postal vote, and his father decided how the family would vote. This lad should have registered where he was living (perhaps he did) but he was definitely registered at a place a few hundred miles away.