Tory candidate for Burnley under police investigation

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:54 pm

Lancashire Police are currently investigating Paul White for breaching electoral law, after he revealed information from postal vote counts.
http://www.burnleyexpress.net/news/poli ... -1-8580415

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:43 pm

What yet another Tory under police investigation.. numbers mounting up.

kentonclaret · Post by **kentonclaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:46 pm

Theresa May keeps cutting back on police numbers but they still find the time and resources to investigate Tory wrongdoing.

whereeaglesfly · Post by **whereeaglesfly** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:58 pm

I have experience of Paul White in Pendle and in my opinion he is a prize prat. He seems to be confident of winning the seat in Burnley which I find surprising given the fact that he recently lost his seat on the County Council. God help the constituents of Burnley if the likes of him ever get elected.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 5:15 pm

They have to investigate because there's a complaint, but all they'll do is refer it up the line. There's nothing to investigate as such (all the facts are ni the public domain) except if whatever he has said is a crime (which it probably is) and whether it will be prosecuted (which it almost certainly won't). It's a "driving at 72mph on the motorway" sort of crime.

whereeaglesfly · Post by **whereeaglesfly** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 6:56 pm

Your probably right DSR, it won't lead to a prosecution.He is being smug about it though which fits in with what I know of his character.

bobinho · Post by **bobinho** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:03 pm

Maybe being busy in the police station is why he hasn't bothered knocking on my door???

At least TRY to win my vote! Is it REALLY a lost cause at local level???

WadingInDeeper · Post by **WadingInDeeper** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:05 pm

bobinho wrote:Maybe being busy in the police station is why he hasn't bothered knocking on my door???

At least TRY to win my vote! Is it REALLY a lost cause at local level???

He's probably gone away on holiday again

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:11 pm

I'm not sure DSR.
Breach of election rules is taken quite seriously in this country, and it's topical at present. It would appear that he's pretty much incriminated himself with his comments, and its clearly unacceptable to give a commentary on how the voting is actually going, and dismissing one party's chances.
I think this is the relevant section of the law:
(6) If a person acts in contravention of this section he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months.

Clarets4me · Post by **Clarets4me** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:43 pm

Given what the Police are having to cope with at present, this is the Political equivalent of turning up at A&E with a broken nail when the Hospital's busy with a major emergency !! I didn't realise Labour was so worried in Burnley..

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:55 pm

Clarets4me wrote:Given what the Police are having to cope with at present, this is the Political equivalent of turning up at A&E with a broken nail when the Hospital's busy with a major emergency !! I didn't realise Labour was so worried in Burnley..

Although I get what you're saying, I think it's pretty serious actually.
If elected he would represent the town for 5 years, and he has sought to gain an unfair advantage by disclosing, (or claiming to know) from postal votes counted that one of the party's votes has collapsed and can't therefore win.
Surely you can see that this threatens the integrity of the vote?
It's fine to claim that another party is doing badly based on polls / canvassing etc., but it's entirely another to back this up by revealing postal votes prior to the election day.

Rosehill Claret · Post by **Rosehill Claret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:08 pm

Why do postal votes need to be opened in advance of election day?

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:08 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:I'm not sure DSR.
Breach of election rules is taken quite seriously in this country, and it's topical at present. It would appear that he's pretty much incriminated himself with his comments, and its clearly unacceptable to give a commentary on how the voting is actually going, and dismissing one party's chances.
I think this is the relevant section of the law:
(6) If a person acts in contravention of this section he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months.

What is going on in counting postal votes before polling day? No votes should be counted until after the polls close. All postal votes should be held under seal until that time. None of the candidates should have access to any of the postal votes at any time - not before polling day and not after polling day. Remember, it is a secret ballot.

I expect that someone will be along shortly to tell me that postal votes are allowed to be counted before polling day. This may be what the polling procedures allow, but it's just one example of the weakening of the election procedures. Weren't the rules on postal voting re-written (I want to say "relaxed" but this would be a judgement) to make it easier for people to vote? Hasn't the result of the new rules being higher frequency of voter fraud?

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:09 pm

Rosehill Claret wrote:Why do postal votes need to be opened in advance of election day?

Snap!

See above.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:14 pm

I'm voting 3 times on Thursday!. (Once for the wrong party

)

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:17 pm

Rosehill Claret wrote:Why do postal votes need to be opened in advance of election day?

Totally agree - but this doesn't excuse what he has done or diminish its seriousness.

Clarets4me · Post by **Clarets4me** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:30 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Although I get what you're saying, I think it's pretty serious actually.
If elected he would represent the town for 5 years, and he has sought to gain an unfair advantage by disclosing, (or claiming to know) from postal votes counted that one of the party's votes has collapsed and can't therefore win.
Surely you can see that this threatens the integrity of the vote?
It's fine to claim that another party is doing badly based on polls / canvassing etc., but it's entirely another to back this up by revealing postal votes prior to the election day.

It was a Buzz-Feed journalist from London, and I'm sure he'll claim that his comments were " off the record ", and never meant to be quoted ". Then he'll criticise the " poor quality of journalism " , whilst castigating the article for picturing " our wonderful town in such a poor light " !!
That's what I'd do if I'd f****d up like this !!

Walton · Post by **Walton** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:36 pm

Paul White is a proper tosspot

Clarets4me · Post by **Clarets4me** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:19 pm

Hopefully, I can shed some light on this....

I have stood as a Candidate and been both an Agent and Counting Agent at various elections in Burnley over the past 3 years and I've witnessed the postal voting opening process on several occasions...

In the Postal vote envelopes are two pieces of paper, one is the ballot paper, and one is the declaration. The declaration has a signature and date of birth on it, by which the postal voter declares their identity. Once opened, the first piece of paper is then checked against a microfiche to ensure that the date of birth and more importantly, the signatures match against the original PV application. If all is well, then the Ballot paper is then seperately put in a ballot box. If there appears to be a discrepancy, then the declaration is referred to the Returning Officer for a judgement. At no point prior to the official count, are the ballots counted. Any Candidate or their Agent, is permitted to observe this process, which happens on set dates prior to, and on polling day it'self ! They consciously place Ballot papers face down to hide the preferences from any Observers ! The Ballots are then added to those cast, on the day, and counted in the usual way..

If this wasn't done, then we'd be waiting on Election night for up to 9,000 Postal Ballots to be verified !! Burnley is assidious in following the correct process, as the Borough is one of 31 areas highlighted by the Electoral Commission, as being " at risk " of the Postal Voting system being abused. The majority of the 31 areas have large numbers of voters of Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi heritage, where the " Biradari " system of Male decision making and Clan based voting is still prominent.

From my experience, the Election officials and staff at Burnley Council ( Especially Alison & Jennifer in the Elections Office ), are universally helpful, treat all Candidates with unfailing courtesy, and the people of Burnley are lucky to have them...

I think Paul White was guilty of talking up his own chances to a journalist rather too much, rather reconfirming the view of him that previous posters have expressed on here....

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:27 pm

Clarets4me wrote: I think Paul White was guilty of talking up his own chances to a journalist rather too much, rather reconfirming the view of him that previous posters have expressed on here....

So, he's either seen the voting intentions, or, (probably more likely) he's deliberately made a false statement, (by saying that he had), in order to try to convince voters that voting for the Lib Dems would be a wasted vote.
Either way, it's clearly wrong and I believe it was correct to report this. We may have a dubious system of FPTP, but the integrity of the election must be upheld.

basil6345789 · Post by **basil6345789** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:32 pm

Desperate smearing attempt

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:39 pm

basil6345789 wrote:Desperate smearing attempt

How is it a smear?
He's boasted to a news agency that he's seen the postal votes and that the Liberal vote has collapsed.
It may or may not be true, but it's a problem entirely of his own making. You can argue as to how serious an issue it is, but it's him that's leaked this information that he has seen these ballot papers that he was forbidden by law not to see, and he has also used that information to try to gain an electoral advantage.
The Labour Party haven't accused him of anything, he himself has admitted it.

TractorFace · Post by **TractorFace** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:12 pm

Anyway, did he mention he would be going away on holiday during the GE campaign when he addressed the Burnley Conservative Association adoption meeting?

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:14 pm

TractorFace wrote:Anyway, did he mention he would be going away on holiday during the GE campaign when he addressed the Burnley Conservative Association adoption meeting?

Was he with Liam Fox, Jeremy Hunt, Phil Hammond and a few others?

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:20 pm

The very fact a Tory is only 10/3 to win Burnley speaks volumes about the state labour are in.

conyoviejo · Post by **conyoviejo** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:23 pm

Walton wrote:Paul White is a proper tosspot

Exactly Walton.

brexit · Post by **brexit** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:58 pm

He was grassed up by coopers election agent townsend. This is a nuisance complaint the police will take no action. She is worried she is going to lose the election , so much that she has actually been seen in Burnley talking to citizens. She makes Kitty Usher look like a dynamic MP.
The labour party take it for granted that the thick residents of Burnley will vote for any candidate with a labour rosette
Demographically Burnley has changed and we will have a Tory MP on friday.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:24 pm

brexit wrote:He was grassed up by coopers election agent townsend. This is a nuisance complaint the police will take no action. She is worried she is going to lose the election , so much that she has actually been seen in Burnley talking to citizens. She makes Kitty Usher look like a dynamic MP.
The labour party take it for granted that the thick residents of Burnley will vote for any candidate with a labour rosette
Demographically Burnley has changed and we will have a Tory MP on friday.

That's not "grassing". Grassing is when you take part or plan to take part in a crime, and then change your mind and tell the police about it. If you witness a crime and tell the police, that's not being a grass.

I'm not saying that Cooper's complaint wasn't a nuisance complaint, mind. Just that it wasn't grassing.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:43 pm

dsr wrote:That's not "grassing". Grassing is when you take part or plan to take part in a crime, and then change your mind and tell the police about it. If you witness a crime and tell the police, that's not being a grass.

I'm not saying that Cooper's complaint wasn't a nuisance complaint, mind. Just that it wasn't grassing.

We may disagree at times, (DSR) but you are always fair, and respect our democratic processes.
Wouldn't you agree that he has in effect "grassed himself" up by posting this, and that Labour have every right to complain , since it is clearly against electoral laws to tell prospective voters that you've already seen "from the evidence of postal votes" that one party have no chance of winning - so therefore don't waste your vote on them, help keep Labour out.
Whether he has seen the ballot papers or not is - at this stage - irrelevant. You just can't have prospective MPs and their agents trying to manipulate voters in this way.That's why the rules are there.
I'm sure you'd be outraged if the Labour candidate in Pendle did what White has done in order to try to steal Lib Dem votes and unseat Stephenson.
(By the way, I don't even vote in the Burnley constituency, so it's not as though I have a vested interest)

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:03 am

Dirty tricks by Labour, cos they might lose Burnley. People read the headline and automatically think something shady as happened. The very worst social and political tactic.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:05 am

You can report anybody and anything to the police and then they investigate and then you say they're under police investigation. 0/10 for the O.P.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:13 am

Pstotto wrote:Dirty tricks by Labour, cos they might lose Burnley. People read the headline and automatically think something shady as happened. The very worst social and political tactic.

But the guy has openly admitted to Buzz feed that he has broken election rules, and it is shady. How can you defend it? He's sought to gain an unfair advantage by breaking the law. It's not even a grey area, and he didn't do it by mistake. You can't just defend him, because he's wearing your colour of rosette.
If Cooper had done the same thing, then you would rightly be up in arms about it.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:19 am

I'm just going by the latest Burnley Express page news.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:21 am

nil_desperandum wrote:We may disagree at times, (DSR) but you are always fair, and respect our democratic processes.
Wouldn't you agree that he has in effect "grassed himself" up by posting this, and that Labour have every right to complain , since it is clearly against electoral laws to tell prospective voters that you've already seen "from the evidence of postal votes" that one party have no chance of winning - so therefore don't waste your vote on them, help keep Labour out.
Whether he has seen the ballot papers or not is - at this stage - irrelevant. You just can't have prospective MPs and their agents trying to manipulate voters in this way.That's why the rules are there.
I'm sure you'd be outraged if the Labour candidate in Pendle did what White has done in order to try to steal Lib Dem votes and unseat Stephenson.
(By the way, I don't even vote in the Burnley constituency, so it's not as though I have a vested interest)

Definitely his own fault. Whether it's a big fault or a little fault, we need a legal expert to confirm, I dare say. I'm not outraged, more shaking my head about supposedly intelligent people doing stupid things. It's like footballers on twitter - the only way to be interesting is to say something stupid.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:31 am

Pstotto wrote:I'm just going by the latest Burnley Express page news.

It appears that you are just reporting White's response to the complaint, but here's the relevant paragraph form the original Burnley Express report that could see him jailed for 6 months.

"He told BuzzFeed News: "It’s (Burnley) traditionally been a Labour/Lib Dem marginal, but what we have seen is that the Lib Dem vote has completely collapsed in Burnley. “Gordon Birtwistle was a popular MP, a pretty active MP. I’ve been surprised at the depth of the drop in the Liberal Democrat vote. When you go to things like postal vote openings you get a good gauge for things.

Read more at: http://www.burnleyexpress.net/news/poli ... -1-8580415" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As a candidate you're simply not allowed to look at postal votes in advance of the count, and even if he didn't, he said that he did, in order to try to get an electoral advantage, so basically he is in the wrong.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:35 am

dsr wrote: I'm not outraged, more shaking my head about supposedly intelligent people doing stupid things. It's like footballers on twitter - the only way to be interesting is to say something stupid.

So if this happened in reverse in Pendle, i.e. the Labour candidate effectively advised Lib Dem voters to vote for him because they were doing so badly in the postal votes and couldn't win, and then Stephenson lost his seat by a few dozen votes, you'd just shake your head?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:38 am

nil_desperandum wrote:So if this happened in reverse in Pendle, i.e. the Labour candidate effectively advised Lib Dem voters to vote for him because they were doing so badly in the postal votes and couldn't win, and then Stephenson lost his seat by a few dozen votes, you'd just shake your head?

There's a lot of ifs there. I don't get that excited (or surprised) when a politician uses mildly dirty tricks. There's been a lot of hyperbole about the Tories' "electoral fraud" by people who know perfectly well that it's just a very fine point about how election expenses are calculated; I don't get excited about that.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:14 am

dsr wrote:There's a lot of ifs there.

Just the one actually - at the beginning.
This incident is in no way similar to the expenses cases. It shouldn't matter what political party you support, seeking to gain an advantage in the way White has done is unacceptable, and the fact that he probably didn't realise it was illegal is no defence.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 9:10 am

nil_desperandum wrote:Just the one actually - at the beginning.
This incident is in no way similar to the expenses cases. It shouldn't matter what political party you support, seeking to gain an advantage in the way White has done is unacceptable, and the fact that he probably didn't realise it was illegal is no defence.

Two ifs, actually. Stephenson losing by a couple of dozen votes was an "if" as well. I agree what White did is unacceptable, it's just a matter of to what degree. And not realising it was illegal (which is stupid, because he ought to know the rules) is no defence, but it is mitigation.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 9:25 am

No it isn't.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 9:38 am

Paul White has had previous run ins with the police, after he and a few other Tory councillors accepted a £20k donation from a firm - who they then granted planning permission to.

He keeps unsavoury company too.A quick google will show the type of drug fiends he calls close friends

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:58 pm

I wouldn't have thought he'd have any access to postal votes. He doesn't do the counting.

conyoviejo · Post by **conyoviejo** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 1:01 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:Paul White has had previous run ins with the police, after he and a few other Tory councillors accepted a £20k donation from a firm - who they then granted planning permission to.

He keeps unsavoury company too.A quick google will show the type of drug fiends he calls close friends

Exactly..

bfcjg · Post by **bfcjg** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 1:03 pm

I was hoping that Paul White would be whiter than white, now if I say I am voting for Birtwistle because he is whiter than White and I mistakenly put a capital W in does that make me a racist ?

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:13 pm

Why was my thread and fatboy's thread padlocked earlier?

Were they really the most contentious Politics posts on here in the last five weeks..I don't think so.

I can take or leave the Politics stuff myself, but it passes time while we wait for the new football season.

Just as well the Politics threads were on here in recent weeks, or this forum would have seized up.

Check the number of views/clicks...thousands and thousands of them - someone is interested.

Not a single football thread should have been hindered by anything else that is posted on here - there is room for all sorts of posting, it is one of the strengths of this forum.

There really is a limit to how much discussion we can have on here about Burnley FC transfer speculation, and what SD'S next club might be.
- at this time of year there is inevitably less football chat...so there is room for other stuff.

So why was I padlocked? - read it, it's still there. I have been against censorship all my life, and that includes on here.

Pathetic moderating...I couldn't care less if you ban me.

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:29 pm

Are you going to post this on every thread smacked arse ?

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:29 pm

Pstotto wrote:I wouldn't have thought he'd have any access to postal votes. He doesn't do the counting.

Well apparently they do, (I guess it's so that they can verify that they are happy with the procedural way it's being done). but they're not allowed by law to see the votes cast.
I think it's quite possible that no one at the Town Hall did let him see what he claimed to see.
However the point is that he claimed that he had seen the postal votes and that the Lib Dem vote had collapsed. (In other words he was saying - when you go out on Thursday don't waste your vote, only I can beat Labour.)
You will understand why this breaches electoral law and carries a potential jail sentence.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:32 pm

46..I'll post where I like, not too interested what you think, you are the least of my daily concerns trust me.

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:33 pm

That padlock has actually made you cry.

Oh dear

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:47 pm

Are you capable of writing a post with more than thirteen words in it?