The Guardian’s splash today is eye-catching. Greenpeace, masquerading as the gloriously named Windefensible (shades of Chris Morris’s Nonce Sense), covertly recorded Chris Heaton-Harris MP making extraordinary admissions.
He set out a covert plan to pretend to run the Telegraph’s science-denial correspondent James Delingpole as a candidate, only to have him withdraw before putting his nomination in and to endorse the Tories. This scheme was designed to mislead the electors of Corby and to skew Tory party policy, and Delingpole played his role perfectly.
On one level, it’s funny, and they got caught before election day. On another, though, it’s extremely serious and potentially illegal.
The fact that Delingpole didn’t file doesn’t exempt them both from electoral law, especially Heaton-Harris, who as the Tories’ agent is effectively acting with the party’s authority.
How can a candidate be involved in electoral fraud when they don’t stand? Before we come to the law, the principle isn’t hard to understand. Let’s do a totally hypothetical example. Let’s say a leftish party of government faced a by-election after becoming involved in a war. If their rightwing opponents faked up an anti-war candidate to attack the government candidate from the left (in a way they couldn’t themselves, assuming they supported the war) that could be assumed to depress left turnout for the government candidate. Conversely, the governing party in that example could fake up an anti-war candidate, then have them fold just before nominations closed and get them to endorse the leftish candidate.
It’s fraud, essentially.
I’m no expert in electoral law, but there are at least two other offences potentially involved here, both as part of the 1983 Representation of the People Act. Were any donations made to Delingpole’s campaign by Conservatives? Section 71A on the control of donations may apply here if so. More obviously, Section 107 covers the “corrupt withdrawal from candidature”. Beyond that, false statements may have been made under the terms of Section 106, the section Phil Woolas was convicted under.
Update: it’s been pointed out to me by legal blogger @loveandgarbage that §118A of the 1983 Act confirms that a person becomes a candidate for the purposes of the Act no later than “the day on which he is so declared by himself or by others“, which Delingpole has clearly done, and is not dependent on the filing of nomination papers, payment of a deposit etc. That exposes Delingpole to far more of the Act’s restrictions, and may broaden the offences that need to be considered.
Anyway, I’ve asked the local police to sort it out. Letter below.
Hello all at Northants Police,
I note the Guardian’s cover story today about the covert arrangements between Chris Heaton-Harris MP, the Conservative Party’s agent in the Corby by-election, and James Delingpole, Telegraph columnist and putative candidate. I’m sure you’ll be familiar with the article and the film it’s based upon, but if not, it’s here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/13/tory-mp-
It appears that both Mr Heaton-Harris and Mr Delingpole may have breached electoral law, including potentially sections 71A and 107 of the Representation of the People Act 1983. The former covers control of donations to candidates (depending on whether the donations mentioned were actually made to Mr Delingpole), and the second covers corrupt withdrawal from candidature.
Further offences of dishonesty may also have been committed specifically by Mr Heaton-Harris by his support for an apparently competitive candidacy, a candidacy we now know to have been devised by Conservative members and activists in order to skew both the election and party policy (the latter intention not being covered by electoral law).
Please can you let me know what action you might take with regard to these potential offences?
Yours
James Mackenzie
#1 by James on November 14, 2012 - 4:39 pm
Reply received:
#2 by Phil on November 14, 2012 - 6:37 pm
I’m not sure. “Corrupt withdrawal” specifically refers to inducements to withdraw; candidacies that were fake from the outset don’t seem to be covered. 71A says that any election-related donations must be provided to the candidate or his/her agent; again, I can’t see how it fits the case.
But if electoral law doesn’t cover this case, it really ought to!
#3 by Roddy Campbell on November 14, 2012 - 6:58 pm
Can I invoke the West Lothian question, sort of?
Why on earth do you give a rat’s arse about Conservative (essentially unrepresented in Scotland) and Delingpole (essentially UKIP) behaviour in Northants (defo in England)?
Is it because you want us to pay your wind farm subsidies? So don’t like seeing wind policy attacked?
Honestly, build as many as you want, so long as we (English) don’t have to pay the subsidies to absentee probably English probably Tory moor-owning landlords, in the form of a regressive tax hitting the poor hardest on utility bills.
If you can sell that policy domestically in Scotland go right ahead.
🙂
#4 by stephen on November 14, 2012 - 8:11 pm
Excellent work.
#5 by Jonathan Mackie on November 14, 2012 - 8:19 pm
To be pedantic, PPERA 2000 did away with Section 118 of RoPA 1983 and replaced it with this:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/41/section/135
but which amounts to the same thing anyway.
#6 by James on November 14, 2012 - 10:21 pm
Thanks Jonathan, I’d missed that.
#7 by John Ruddy on November 14, 2012 - 8:21 pm
Except Heaton-Harris ISNT the tories election agent.
http://www.corby.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/Notice%20of%20Election%20Agents%20Name%20%20Offices_0.pdf
Its Matthew Edmonds who I understand is connected with the local conservative association.
H-H may be in charge of the campaign, but as he is not officially the agent, I’m not sure theres a legal aspect here.
#8 by James on November 14, 2012 - 10:23 pm
Interesting. He’s widely cited as such, which could be consistent with that if he’s an authorised sub-agent acting under the authority of, etc.
#9 by Jonathan Mackie on November 14, 2012 - 8:28 pm
Oops, appears I missed out the paragraph preceding my pedantry which was:
Delingpole appears to have been thinking he was covered under the original RoPA 1983 but not the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 which updated the definition of “candidate” and pretty much did away with legal fictions like “prospective candidate”. The original Section 118 of RoPA 1983 was fairly restrictive in terms of who was legally a candidate (which mostly had implications for expenses) and PPERA loosened the definition.
Pingback: Was James Delingpole a candidate in the Corby by-election? | Love and Garbage – some commonplace musings
#10 by Iain Menzies on November 14, 2012 - 10:50 pm
From what ive seen on guido and from delingpole in the telegraph….i dont know that i wouldnt be calling in some nice libel QC’s about this.
#11 by James on November 14, 2012 - 11:06 pm
That’s always a good way to keep libel QCs in port, especially when there’s video evidence.
#12 by Kim on November 15, 2012 - 9:45 am
Good work James. I was asking similar questions, and was prepared to contact the police about this. I’d love to know what their response is. It looks like fraud to me.