Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2014 11:33:22 GMT
BirminghamKingstandingLabour resignedCandidates ( source) Graham LIPPIATT (Liberal Democrats) Lorraine OWEN (Labour Party Candidate) Gary SAMBROOK (The Conservative Party Candidate) Roger TEMPEST (UK Independence Party (UKIP)) Terry WILLIAMS ( no label) [Note from Birmingham City Council - Please note Terry Williams did not fill in the description section of the nomination form, meaning his party affiliation is not listed. We can confirm that he is a registered candidate for the National Front party. The city’s elections office did contact Mr Williams and his election agent to raise this matter but his nomination form was not re-submitted by the deadline. The National Front logo will appear on election documentation and he will be referred to as a candidate for the National Front when results are declared etc.) 2008 - Lab 1,376, Con 1,296, BNP 648, LD 254, Green 105, NF 54 2010 - Lab 3,372, Con 2,792, BNP 891, LD 866, NF 160, Green 103 2011 - Lab 2,210, Con 2,035, BNP 344, LD 128, Green 121 2012 - Lab 2,014, Con 1,609, BNP 213, Green 106, LD 80, NF 34 RichmondshireReeth & ArkengarthdaleIndependent diedCandidates ( source) Richard BEAL ( no label) Dave MORTON (The Conservative Party Candidate) 2003 - Ind. unopposed. 2007 - Ind. unopposed. 2011 - Ind 514, Con 70
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,261
|
Post by Tony Otim on Jan 21, 2014 11:41:05 GMT
Gary Sambrook was formerly of this parish (or its predecessor) wasn't he?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2014 13:26:06 GMT
he was and did post about a year back.
finally BCC have uploaded the SOPN after I asked them why it was not.
|
|
|
|
Post by David Ashforth on Jan 21, 2014 20:35:42 GMT
| Ward map | Census map | | BIRMINGHAM - Kingstanding | link | link | | RICHMONDSHIRE - Reeth and Arkengarthdale | link | link |
|
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jan 24, 2014 18:14:35 GMT
[Note from Birmingham City Council - Please note Terry Williams did not fill in the description section of the nomination form, meaning his party affiliation is not listed. We can confirm that he is a registered candidate for the National Front party. The city’s elections office did contact Mr Williams and his election agent to raise this matter but his nomination form was not re-submitted by the deadline. The National Front logo will appear on election documentation and he will be referred to as a candidate for the National Front when results are declared etc.) What! ? Since when could you have party details inserted post-nomination? |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 24, 2014 18:47:56 GMT
Is it possible to withdraw the first nomination, and then submit a new set of nomination papers?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2014 19:15:51 GMT
they asked them to do it and he never. In all the election I can remeber he stood as NF and I think the election officer is spot on to do this.
|
|
|
|
Post by marksenior on Jan 24, 2014 19:34:00 GMT
I find this incredible and possibly unlawful . There have been occasions when certainly Labour and Lib Dem candidates have not submitted the correct piece of paper which allows them to use a party name and/or logo and they have not been able to correct this post nominations closing .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2014 22:17:41 GMT
they must have checked before hand ... we need DB on this !
|
|
|
|
Post by marksenior on Jan 24, 2014 22:29:23 GMT
they must have checked before hand ... we need DB on this ! I am sure I can recall a couple of elections in 2011 where one of two or three of the Labour candidates in a ward did not have the Red Rose logo on the ballot paper following an error in submitting their nomination papers and polled much lower than the other candidates . |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 24, 2014 22:37:41 GMT
The procedure for getting the party logo on the ballot paper is separate from that for authorising the party name, although they're normally sorted at the same time. It's therefore possible to cock up one of them but not the other.
Most but not all Labour candidates in the Cities of London and Westminster constituency at the 2010 local elections had no Labour rose logo on the ballot paper. In one ward, two did and one didn't - working out which ward this was, and what the effect of was, is left as an exercise to the reader.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2014 22:38:26 GMT
so David, in the case of BCC can they do that ?
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 25, 2014 5:33:33 GMT
What happened in the abovementioned case is perfectly proper and legal, for the reason that David has already explained. The description "National Front" has not been "inserted" anywhere "after" nominations closed, as some people seem to think. What happened is simply that he forgot to write in the description on the ballot paper and to have the authorisation certificate from the party to say that he was an NF candidate. He did, however, remember to have the authorisation certificate to allow the use of the NF logo, which would equally have had to come from the party. It is therefore clear that he is a properly nominated and authorised candidate of a party.
There have been some cases where a candidate of a party has chosen not to use a logo; this is an unusual case of the opposite case where he has "chosen" not to use the party name.
|
|
jompy
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9 
|
Post by jompy on Jan 30, 2014 22:48:10 GMT
The National Front is currently at war with itself. The former leader and nominating officer resigned and then un-resigned his positions last summer and is still listed with the Electoral Commission. As a result there is basically a NF north and NF south and the north are fundraising to sue the NF south. It's all very entertaining if you are interested in the far-right.
I suspect the cock up with the name of the party on the ballot is due to this ongoing spat. I think this is the ward where Sharon Ebanks came very close to winning for the BNP in 2005 or 06.
|
|
|
|
Post by independentukip on Jan 30, 2014 23:09:46 GMT
There was a wide margin stopping Ms Ebanks winning in 2006 and she wasn't 'very close' to winning at all. It seems 2004 was the best chance but even then they weren't very close to gaining the 3rd seat in that ward. Perhaps the strong 2004 result was why Ms Ebanks contested Kingstanding in 2006?
|
|
jompy
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9
|
Post by jompy on Jan 31, 2014 15:11:28 GMT
From what I remember she was declared the winner and the Labour party lodged an appeal and it was overturned.
|
|
jompy
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9
|
Post by jompy on Jan 31, 2014 15:16:34 GMT
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/4765495.stmThe Labour Party has lodged a petition with the High Court to overturn a local election result which gave a BNP candidate a seat by mistake. Sharon Ebanks became Birmingham's first ever BNP councillor last week when she was officially declared to have won the poll in Kingstanding. Officials announced her win after two recounts but later slashed her vote from 2,310 to 1,329. Rules mean the announced result can only be overturned in court. It means Ms Ebanks was therefore able to take up the seat, even though she only came in third, according to the returning officer. Once the votes have been re-counted, the electors in Kingstanding will get the Labour councillors they actually voted for Sion Simon, Labour MP Labour has now taken the battle to the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court where it lodged an election petition on Thursday. The petition has been served on Ms Ebanks and the city council's returning officer, Stephen Hughes. The declaration for the ward had Sharon Ebanks (BNP) and Zoe Hopkins (Lab) elected. But Mr Hughes said last week the recalculation indicated Zoe Hopkins (Lab) and Catharine Grundy (Lab) should have been elected. He said it appeared some BNP votes had been counted twice. Sion Simon, who is Labour MP for the Erdington constituency which covers the Kingstanding ward, said: "We have lodged the petition with the High Court and asked that the votes be re-counted. "Once the votes have been re-counted, the electors in Kingstanding will get the Labour councillors they actually voted for."
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 31, 2014 15:32:05 GMT
From what I remember she was declared the winner and the Labour party lodged an appeal and it was overturned. Kingstanding in 2006 was a double vacancy election - one of the other councillors had resigned, so two seats were up, and each voter had two votes on the same ballot paper (but could not use both of them on the same candidate). However voters could choose to use just one of their votes. The problem came when an error was made during counting/tallying to count individual votes twice. Most of Ebanks' votes were individual votes, but very few of Labour's were. Hence the result was substantially different: | Candidate | Description | Result as declared | Actual result | | | Sharon Elizabeth Ebanks | British National Party | 2,310 | 1,329 | | Zoe Hopkins | The Labour Party Candidate | 2,088 | 1,894 | | Catharine Cecilia Grundy | The Labour Party Candidate | 1,973 | 1,823 | | Mick Hawker | The Conservative Party Candidate | 1,349 | 1,134 | | Terry Williams | | 1,207 | 615 | | Robert John Higginson | The Conservative Party Candidate | 1,043 | 966 | | Mark Haddon | Liberal Democrat | 719 | 514 | | Richard John William Pitt | The Green Party | 606 | 315 | | Hubert Joseph Duffy | Liberal Democrat | 597 | 446 | | Anne Rita Bennett | Independent | 328 | 171 | | Mohammed Omar Malik | Independent | 109 | 58 |
|
|
|
|
Post by timokane on Feb 2, 2014 9:47:28 GMT
From what I remember she was declared the winner and the Labour party lodged an appeal and it was overturned. Kingstanding in 2006 was a double vacancy election - one of the other councillors had resigned, so two seats were up, and each voter had two votes on the same ballot paper (but could not use both of them on the same candidate). However voters could choose to use just one of their votes. The problem came when an error was made during counting/tallying to count individual votes twice. Most of Ebanks' votes were individual votes, but very few of Labour's were. Hence the result was substantially different: | Candidate | Description | Result as declared | Actual result | | | Sharon Elizabeth Ebanks | British National Party | 2,310 | 1,329 | | Zoe Hopkins | The Labour Party Candidate | 2,088 | 1,894 | | Catharine Cecilia Grundy | The Labour Party Candidate | 1,973 | 1,823 | | Mick Hawker | The Conservative Party Candidate | 1,349 | 1,134 | | Terry Williams | | 1,207 | 615 | | Robert John Higginson | The Conservative Party Candidate | 1,043 | 966 | | Mark Haddon | Liberal Democrat | 719 | 514 | | Richard John William Pitt | The Green Party | 606 | 315 | | Hubert Joseph Duffy | Liberal Democrat | 597 | 446 | | Anne Rita Bennett | Independent | 328 | 171 | | Mohammed Omar Malik | Independent | 109 | 58 |
What a balls up. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2014 21:30:38 GMT
One thing I can say is that with the amount of resources poured into Kingstanding by Labour if we fail to win it then some questions to be asked.
|
|
