Local Council by-elections 11th January 2024

[J.G.Harston]

Dec 25, 2023 0:57:43 GMT listener said:

The Seaham Community Party, which came a close second (102 votes behind), demanded they automatically take the vacant seat. The Returning Officer, however, called a by-election. 

That's close to being written as it being the RO's choice. "The Returning Office called a by-election as required." British election law does not provide the power to appoint people to vacant seats. Maybe SCP though they were living in Northern Ireland.

[batman]

I suppose that the precedent they would have been citing was that of the Bristol SE by-election in 1960, when Tony Benn won, was disqualified as ineligible, and his Conservative opponent was declared elected.

[batman]

However, that was after an election petition & court, not the returning officer making the decision off their own bat.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

The Bristol South East precedent (and two others in Northern Ireland from the 1950s) only happened because the Election Courts determined that the disqualification of the candidate who had obtained the most votes was manifest to any voter. In all three cases their opponents had gone to extraordinary efforts to publicise it and had then proved the same to the Courts, enabling the Courts to apply the ‘votes thrown away’ doctrine.

It will be interesting to see if this is followed in Dorset, although the lack of time for an election petition probably makes it pointless. There doesn’t seem to be any precedent for Commissioners in local government election petitions making such a finding; they have always avoided elections where the winner turned out to be disqualified.

[andrewteale]

We have recently had the case of Jeff Milburn, who stood (unsuccessfully) for South Tyneside council in May 2023 despite knowing that he was ineligible due to receiving two previous suspended prison sentences within the last five years. In November he was sentenced to 10 months in prison for making a false declaration on his nomination papers, although presumably his criminal record was an aggravating factor there.

[timrollpickering]

Dec 25, 2023 0:57:43 GMT listener said:

The Seaham Community Party, which came a close second (102 votes behind), demanded they automatically take the vacant seat. The Returning Officer, however, called a by-election.

The law does not allow the RO to just hand over the seat. Only an election court can do that if it is satisfied the wrong candidate was elected by errors in the count or voters knowingly threw away their votes on an ineligible candidate. And the latter requires clear evidence of voter knowledge of this. The 1950s & 1960s parliamentary cases were high profile (indeed in two of them the by-election was caused by the same candidate's ineligibility), a local council case is not.

(There's been a recent case that suggests the resignation of an unduly elected office holder does not automatically create the circumstances for a by-election. But that would be where the original election is being challenged rather than the councillor's eligibility to sit.)

[timrollpickering]

Dec 25, 2023 8:50:46 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

There doesn’t seem to be any precedent for Commissioners in local government election petitions making such a finding; they have always avoided elections where the winner turned out to be disqualified.

Isn't that as much down to the difficulty of doing so? All three parliamentary cases were clear cut with the eligibility having already been determined. A case of a council candidate's employment is not likely to have actually been ruled on, leaving uncertainly and any rival candidate who tried to declare the opponent definitely unqualified could be taling their own risk.

There's also the practical problem of getting the media that voters consume, especially in a fragmented landscape, to run with the story leaving it down to posters that postal voters won't see and leaflets that won't reach everyone.

[minionofmidas]

Dec 25, 2023 10:44:01 GMT timrollpickering said:

Dec 25, 2023 0:57:43 GMT listener said:

The Seaham Community Party, which came a close second (102 votes behind), demanded they automatically take the vacant seat. The Returning Officer, however, called a by-election.

The law does not allow the RO to just hand over the seat. Only an election court can do that if it is satisfied the wrong candidate was elected by errors in the count or voters knowingly threw away their votes on an ineligible candidate. And the latter requires clear evidence of voter knowledge of this. The 1950s & 1960s parliamentary cases were high profile (indeed in two of them the by-election was caused by the same candidate's ineligibility)

no, it was even weirder. The 2nd by-election occurred after it was discovered that the Unionist loser seated instead of the victorious IRA prisoner was also disqualified, by virtue of holding an office of very much negligible profit on a local employment tribunal. (The first by-election occurred because the Unionist initially did not seek redress in Election Court, so the first disqualification could not lead to the runner-up being seated.)

[timrollpickering]

Dec 25, 2023 21:36:00 GMT minionofmidas said:

Dec 25, 2023 10:44:01 GMT timrollpickering said:

The law does not allow the RO to just hand over the seat. Only an election court can do that if it is satisfied the wrong candidate was elected by errors in the count or voters knowingly threw away their votes on an ineligible candidate. And the latter requires clear evidence of voter knowledge of this. The 1950s & 1960s parliamentary cases were high profile (indeed in two of them the by-election was caused by the same candidate's ineligibility)

no, it was even weirder. The 2nd by-election occurred after it was discovered that the Unionist loser seated instead of the victorious IRA prisoner was also disqualified, by virtue of holding an office of very much negligible profit on a local employment tribunal. (The first by-election occurred because the Unionist initially did not seek redress in Election Court, so the first disqualification could not lead to the runner-up being seated.)

It was the 1955 by-election not the 1956 one that was overturned on the principle of votes being knowingly thrown away on an ineligible candidate. The second by-election could have been avoided by the Commons voting to grant relief but given the circumstances it wouldn't have been prudent.

By "the same candidate's ineligibility" I meant that in both Mid Ulster in 1955 and Bristol South East in 1961 the by-election was won by the person who had just been disqualified as an MP causing the by-election in the first place. These were far from the first occasions when constituencies returned the same MP despite being told their choice was unacceptable - Wilkes and Bradlaugh spring most readily to mind.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

I have tried to work out why, when the circumstances in Fermanagh and South Tyrone and in Mid-Ulster were practically identical, the Unionists in FST went straight for an election petition to claim an undue election, while in Mid-Ulster no petition was lodged after the general election and the Unionists just left the House of Commons to disqualify Mitchell and cause a byelection. At first I thought it might be that in Mid-Ulster, there was insufficient notice given of Mitchell's disqualification, but this seems not to have been the case - Charles Beattie's election agent formally published such a notice on 13 May and it was placed in all the main newspapers in Co Tyrone.

There is an "explanation" in The National Archives file HO 328/33 in which Sir Frank Newsam, Permanent Secretary at the Home Office, says he has been told by the Governor of Northern Ireland Lord Wakehurst that the reason for petitioning in Fermanagh and South Tyrone and not in Mid Ulster was "that whereas Colonel Grosvenor was an extremely popular candidate, Mr. Beattie is certainly not". This makes no sense because the petition would claim the seat without needing a new election; why would Wakehurst require the less popular candidate to contest another election, but allow the more popular one to claim a seat without one? If he's suggesting it is because the Mid-Ulster Unionists might have a better candidate, who was it and why did they fall back on Beattie again?

Incidentally Bradlaugh was not unacceptable and no question over his eligibility for election was ever raised; the only issue was religious prejudice within Parliament. Likewise Daniel O'Connell and Baron Lionel de Rothschild were entirely eligible for election, just rendered unable to take their seats at first.

[timrollpickering]

If an elected MP is unable to take their seat and serve as a member and it's not because they are an abstentionist and the constituency re-elects them to it then there is clearly a problem of a disagreement about acceptability somewhere in the system even if few wanted to take it to the logical conclusion and the by-elections were technically over voting without taking the oath.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

Dec 26, 2023 0:05:39 GMT timrollpickering said:

If an elected MP is unable to take their seat and serve as a member and it's not because they are an abstentionist and the constituency re-elects them to it then there is clearly a problem of a disagreement about acceptability somewhere in the system even if few wanted to take it to the logical conclusion and the by-elections were technically over voting without taking the oath.

The problem was with the Select Committee of 1880 which did not accept that the law had already been changed. The problem was with the MPs who exhibited religious bigotry and voted to refuse to let Bradlaugh take his seat. The problem was with the dim Speaker of 1880 who ever allowed the majority to interfere with an individual MP wishing to take their seat. The problem was not with Bradlaugh.

[dundas]

In South Portslade McKinley-Fitch is an libertarian of some sort "anti-Ulez", "evidence-based environmentalism" To gauge your support in a heavily unionised and working class area in a left-wing city is a move Sir Humprey would have called brave.

[batman]

Fitch is a well-known political name in the Brighton area but mostly because of the Labour (or in one case Militant) Fitch family. There are other families called Fitch in the area though, it may be a local name prevalent in Sussex. The Fitch Drive in Moulsecoomb is named after Stan Fitch, who was a several-times Labour councillor & father of Brian & Rod. He lived to see the road named after him.

[kevinf]

Dec 26, 2023 18:02:11 GMT batman said:

Fitch is a well-known political name in the Brighton area but mostly because of the Labour (or in one case Militant) Fitch family. There are other families called Fitch in the area though, it may be a local name prevalent in Sussex. The Fitch Drive in Moulsecoomb is named after Stan Fitch, who was a several-times Labour councillor & father of Brian & Rod. He lived to see the road named after him.

…and famously (in Brighton Labour circles) Stan had a vote in the Kemptown Labour parliamentary selection being fought between Brian and Rod. Rod won very narrowly and as far as I know, Stan never revealed who he voted for. Had the pleasure of driving Stan around knocking up on an Election Day later on, but he still wouldn’t tell me.

[batman]

I had forgotten that Brian went for selection, though it doesn't surprise me as he was always personally ambitious. By the time I came down to study in Brighton, Rod had already been selected. I was registered to vote in Pavilion, and did so in the 1983 general election. I have been delighted in recent years to renew my friendship with the candidate I voted for, who is now a member of Preston CLP - Preston in Lancashire rather than Preston in Brighton! (Of course, Julian Amery who defeated him was previously a Preston MP before representing the Preston district in Brighton as part of the Pavilion constituency.)

[maxque]

Dec 27, 2023 23:13:40 GMT batman said:

I had forgotten that Brian went for selection, though it doesn't surprise me as he was always personally ambitious. By the time I came down to study in Brighton, Rod had already been selected. I was registered to vote in Pavilion, and did so in the 1983 general election. I have been delighted in recent years to renew my friendship with the candidate I voted for, who is now a member of Preston CLP - Preston in Lancashire rather than Preston in Brighton! (Of course, Julian Amery who defeated him was previously a Preston MP before representing the Preston district in Brighton as part of the Pavilion constituency.)

It is amazing to think Brighton Pavilion was a Conservative seat until 1997.

[East Anglian Lefty]

Dec 27, 2023 15:18:42 GMT kevinf said:

Dec 26, 2023 18:02:11 GMT batman said:

Fitch is a well-known political name in the Brighton area but mostly because of the Labour (or in one case Militant) Fitch family. There are other families called Fitch in the area though, it may be a local name prevalent in Sussex. The Fitch Drive in Moulsecoomb is named after Stan Fitch, who was a several-times Labour councillor & father of Brian & Rod. He lived to see the road named after him.

…and famously (in Brighton Labour circles) Stan had a vote in the Kemptown Labour parliamentary selection being fought between Brian and Rod. Rod won very narrowly and as far as I know, Stan never revealed who he voted for. Had the pleasure of driving Stan around knocking up on an Election Day later on, but he still wouldn’t tell me.

There was a similar case in Harwich in 1997, where both Steven and Ivan Henderson went for selection for the parliamentary seat. In that particular case, the repercussions led to the former leaving the party. Did it work out more amicably in Kemptown?

And can anybody else think of any other examples of siblings contesting the same selection?

[ricmk]

Dec 28, 2023 22:06:29 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

Dec 27, 2023 15:18:42 GMT kevinf said:

…and famously (in Brighton Labour circles) Stan had a vote in the Kemptown Labour parliamentary selection being fought between Brian and Rod. Rod won very narrowly and as far as I know, Stan never revealed who he voted for. Had the pleasure of driving Stan around knocking up on an Election Day later on, but he still wouldn’t tell me.

There was a similar case in Harwich in 1997, where both Steven and Ivan Henderson went for selection for the parliamentary seat. In that particular case, the repercussions led to the former leaving the party. Did it work out more amicably in Kemptown?

And can anybody else think of any other examples of siblings contesting the same selection?

Erm… the obvious one is surely David Miliband vs Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership isn’t it?

[johnloony]

Dec 28, 2023 22:16:18 GMT ricmk said:

Dec 28, 2023 22:06:29 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

There was a similar case in Harwich in 1997, where both Steven and Ivan Henderson went for selection for the parliamentary seat. In that particular case, the repercussions led to the former leaving the party. Did it work out more amicably in Kemptown?

And can anybody else think of any other examples of siblings contesting the same selection?

Erm… the obvious one is surely David Miliband vs Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership isn’t it?

Presidential election, Republic of Kiribati, 4th July 2003:

Anote Tong (Pillars of Truth Party) 13,556
Harry Tong (Protect the Maneaba Party) 12,457
Banjera Barini (Independent) 2,591