Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 0:26:02 GMT
Election declared null and void!!!!!!
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,261
|
Post by Sibboleth on Mar 24, 2017 0:27:31 GMT
wat
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 24, 2017 0:28:43 GMT
Do we all get 100 faults?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 0:29:21 GMT
What does this mean? Assuming this is serious, I'm guessing one of the candidates has died. They appeared to be alive today! |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 24, 2017 0:29:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 24, 2017 0:32:10 GMT
There is no power for the Returning Officer to do this. If a candidate turns out to be ineligible after nomination, they remain on the ballot paper and the election proceeds; if elected, they are then declared disqualified and a further byelection is held.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 0:32:37 GMT
Adam Holden works for Lancashire Growth, which is County Council based. Blackburn with Darwen is Unitary.
|
|
|
|
Post by independentukip on Mar 24, 2017 0:36:29 GMT
The Returning Officer will likely be calling their Union Rep in the morning.
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 24, 2017 0:36:55 GMT
This is the Labour candidate's LinkedIn page: uk.linkedin.com/in/adam-holden-ba-hons-1b39b125Identifies him as employed by Growth Lancashire, which is a council-sponsored body: www.growthlancashire.co.uk/growth-lancashire/Presumably a check has identified that this position could come under s. 80 (1)(aa) of the Local Government Act 1972: "a person shall be disqualified for being elected or being a member of a local authority if he— (aa) holds any employment in a company which, in accordance with Part V of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 other than section 73, is under the control of the local authority" But, as I say, there is no power which permits the Returning Officer to halt a poll if a candidate is discovered to be ineligible. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Mar 24, 2017 0:43:58 GMT
Why was this not picked up at the time of Nomination? It seems a bit odd to allow the election to take place and then point out that a candidate was ineligible.
|
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,271 
|
Post by ricmk on Mar 24, 2017 0:55:01 GMT
I'm with those who think that this isn't right procedurally. The election has validly taken place, however I think we're in Tony Benn territory. If I have it right he /she is elected then disqualified, triggering another by-election.
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 24, 2017 0:56:54 GMT
It seems the RO did act correctly and declare a result:
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,506
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 24, 2017 1:03:36 GMT
Adam Holden works for Lancashire Growth, which is County Council based. Blackburn with Darwen is Unitary. Just because Blackburn with Darwen became a UA in the mid-90s doesn't mean that Blackburn is no longer in Lancashire. The successful candidate was therefore ineligible. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,504
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 24, 2017 1:04:19 GMT
This is the Labour candidate's LinkedIn page: uk.linkedin.com/in/adam-holden-ba-hons-1b39b125Identifies him as employed by Growth Lancashire, which is a council-sponsored body: www.growthlancashire.co.uk/growth-lancashire/Presumably a check has identified that this position could come under s. 80 (1)(aa) of the Local Government Act 1972: "a person shall be disqualified for being elected or being a member of a local authority if he— (aa) holds any employment in a company which, in accordance with Part V of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 other than section 73, is under the control of the local authority" But, as I say, there is no power which permits the Returning Officer to halt a poll if a candidate is discovered to be ineligible. What's the latest that someone can avoid this disqualification (i.e. quit their job?). |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,506
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 24, 2017 1:06:46 GMT
I'm surprised at such a strong showing for It's Our County. I suspect the Conservatives are relieved Herefordshire doesn't go to the polls this May. Indeed. I believe only there, Rutland and East Riding are on different electoral schedules from the other counties? |
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,271
|
Post by ricmk on Mar 24, 2017 1:07:29 GMT
It seems the RO did act correctly and declare a result: Ah right - I retract my previous comment, that does indeed look like it's been handled correctly. What a mess though! |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,504
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 24, 2017 1:11:12 GMT
I suspect the Conservatives are relieved Herefordshire doesn't go to the polls this May. Indeed. I believe only there, Rutland and East Riding are on different electoral schedules from the other counties? Yes. Because they are unitaries that came out of district councils/groups of district councils not existing county councils. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Mar 24, 2017 1:11:50 GMT
Adam Holden works for Lancashire Growth, which is County Council based. Blackburn with Darwen is Unitary. Just because Blackburn with Darwen became a UA in the mid-90s doesn't mean that Blackburn is no longer in Lancashire. The successful candidate was therefore ineligible. There's no therefore about it. The test is whether Blackburn with Darwen council controls Holden's employment. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,506
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 24, 2017 1:15:22 GMT
Just because Blackburn with Darwen became a UA in the mid-90s doesn't mean that Blackburn is no longer in Lancashire. The successful candidate was therefore ineligible. There's no therefore about it. The test is whether Blackburn with Darwen council controls Holden's employment. Those who are based closer to that ward might know more about whether 'Lancashire Growth' has any dealings with, say, Lancashire Police or the Lord-Lieutenant. Unitary status did not stop Blackburn coming under Lancashire for those purposes. I'd be very surprised if the UA council is directly employing the successful candidate. If that is the only criterion for disqualification, then it would appear that the RO has made an error. However, I think the definition of a politically restricted post is rather wider than that. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Mar 24, 2017 1:16:05 GMT
I'm with those who think that this isn't right procedurally. The election has validly taken place, however I think we're in Tony Benn territory. If I have it right he /she is elected then disqualified, triggering another by-election. Benn became ineligible during the parliament so isn't a comparable case. He was declared elected in the 1961 by-election but unseated on petition by a rival candidate whose campaign had highlighted Benn's ineligibility and the court accepted that enough of Benn's voters had known they were throwing away their vote on an ineligible candidate. The same happened in two Northern Ireland cases six years earlier. This is more like the Northern Ireland case where the candidate was elected and then disqualified, prompting another election. |
|
