This morning another email comes from the database of Rudd’s Remainers which you may remember split acrimoniously into different factions in its pre-election People’s Vote incarnation for reasons none of us can quite remember. Tom Baldwin and James McCrory were kicked out and it all sort of fizzled out.
Now it seems yet again to be rebranding as Democracy Unleashed, using a database that has been illegally re-purposed – something that the LibDems got heavily fined for doing. Obviously to avoid that they sent their email this morning signed by the CEO of Open Britain, an older incarnation under the Democracy Unleashed branding. It is a basic tenet of EU GDPR law that data gathered for one purpose can not be used for another without permission. Permission they have neither sought nor been given…
It is Guido’s sad duty to report that the People’s Vote is no more, it has shuffled off this mortal coil and it will now abandon this existence, such as it was. For all the millions of pounds spent and the hundreds of thousands of Waitrose customers who marched, it failed spectacularly. The 52% who voted yesterday to get Brexit done, again, won…
People’s Vote say they will “now refocus its campaign to concentrate on vital social issues that this government must urgently prioritise in its Brexit negotiations. We will remain a grassroots campaigning group who will act on issues of social inequality.”
So yet another centrist organisation will be borne from the ashes of the People’s Vote database just as it rose from Stronger In. We wish them well…
Following fresh revelations today about the Remain campaign overspend during the referendum, Priti Patel has written to the Electoral Commission calling for an investigation. Readers will remember the Electoral Commission refused to investigate previous evidence of Remain overspending, despite investigating Vote Leave for the same thing. Priti warns the Commission there are questions over their impartiality – Guido has the letter:
I am writing, further to our correspondence earlier this year, and in light of the revelations in the Sunday Telegraph about new evidence of services being shared among the various Remain campaigns in the 2016 EU referendum.
I am sure you share my deep concerns that Britain Stronger in Europe seems to have been provided with services by other Remain campaigns without declaring the expenditure in the appropriate way. There is evidence that many campaigns appear to have acted as a mere continuity of the official Remain campaign as it approached its spending limit, the most egregious example of this being the regrettably named ‘Don’t f*ck my future’ campaign, which many different Remain organisations appear to have involved themselves in.
As you will be well aware, the findings in the Sunday Telegraph are just the latest example of concerns being raised about how the Remain campaign conducted itself during the referendum. There have been numerous ‘warning signals’ over the last few months, including several media reports that have strongly suggested that Britain Stronger in Europe tried to circumvent the Electoral Commission’s rules during the EU referendum. As a reminder, these include:
- Admissions by senior figures within Britain Stronger in Europe that they were coordinating messaging and campaign activity with other Remain campaigns including Labour In, Conservatives In and the Liberal Democrats.
- The fact that a number of Remain campaigns were set up in the month leading up to the referendum, which received hundreds of thousands of pounds from donors who had previously made payments to Britain Stronger in Europe and other pro-EU campaigns.
- Reports that Britain Stronger in Europe were delegating ground campaign activity to the Labour Party, potentially sharing campaign material such as leaflets and canvassing data.
When I wrote to you earlier this year to highlight some of these concerning pieces of evidence you decided to take no action – claiming there were no ‘reasonable grounds’ to suspect that these activities were ‘part of a common plan or other arrangement’. We are now faced with a situation where others are instead having to undertake the sort of investigation that the Commission should have taken months ago. It is all the more concerning, as a significant proportion of the evidence cited in the Sunday Telegraph report appears to have come from the Electoral Commission’s own records.
This raises serious questions about the impartiality of the Electoral Commission. The material uncovered in the Sunday Telegraph, coupled with the evidence made public earlier this year, suggests that the Commission has decided to hold Leave campaigns to one standard, and Remain campaigners to another, much lower standard.
In November last year, you decided to open a third investigation into the official Vote Leave campaign, even though you admitted in your assessment that there was no new evidence to justify the reopening of this investigation. Despite the absence of any suggestion that the official Leave campaign indulged in the apparent collusion described above, you have nonetheless continued your investigation.
In reopening the case, you set a very low threshold for triggering an investigation into a campaign. And yet, despite setting this low threshold, you have since refused to open any sort of investigation into the Remain campaign – despite the ever-growing volume of evidence that these campaigners were breaking the Commission’s rules.
I am not unsympathetic to the challenges that the Electoral Commission faces. I understand the reasons behind your suggestion to Parliament that the rules on coordination need to be reviewed. But while I accept the argument that the law should be improved – and that this is beyond your control – what is undeniably in your control is the power to treat campaigns equally.
I believe that the Electoral Commission has an important role to play in our democracy, but that role comes with an important responsibility – to be politically neutral at all times. If you want to restore confidence in the Commission, you should either start a formal investigation into Britain Stronger in Europe, or show equity and end the investigation in Vote Leave. The public – and Parliament – want to see the Commission acting with political balance.
I look forward to hearing from you .
The Rt. Hon. Priti Patel
The threshold for investigation is low, the Electoral Commission is already investigating Vote Leave for lesser alleged offences… It would tell you all you need to know about the Remainer-stuffed Electoral Commission if they refuse to look into this…
In his car crash interview with Andrew Neil yesterday, Continuity Remain campaigner James McGrory said:
“It’s clear there is no mandate to leave the single market. The idea that the Leave campaign spoke with unanimity and with clarity and purpose… and said we will definitely leave the single market is just not true.”
Guido has found a press release sent by Stronger In on 11th May this year. In it, one James McGrory explicitly says that Boris and Vote Leave “plan to pull Britain out of the Single Market”.
There it is in black and white: a Stronger In press release written by McGrory himself admitting Vote Leave openly said Brexit meant leaving the single market. All the clarity and purpose you could ever want. Let this be the last time Continuity Remainers get away with telling this demonstrable untruth.