Thursday, September 30, 2004

Press Release

North East No Campaign
30th September 2004


Government uses costs as a weapon. Judicial Review dropped

The action by the North East No Campaign to force the Government to issue a correction to the 'Have Your Say' Leaflet has been dropped.

The No Campaign wished to have the North East public made fully aware that the statement in the leaflet that the election to the Assembly would be by 'proportional representation,' was wholly misleading as the majority (the constituency members) would be elected by first past the post.

As the Treasury Solicitors worked frantically to respond to the writ over the weekend they repeatedly offered to forego costs if we dropped the case. However, when their defence came before the Judge on Monday they asked for the pre-emptive capping order on costs to be removed. This would leave the No Campaign facing massive potential costs of tens of thousands should the case go to a full hearing.

Neil Herron states, "We believed that the public had a right to be fully aware of the voting system that was being offered. It is ironic that on the ODPM website they have now changed the wording to precisely what we requested, (see section 11) but were prepared to vigorously defend their misleading leaflet. Needless to say we are not surprised that they used costs as a weapon. We are disappointed that NESNO chose not to join us. We had an agreement in principle personally from John Elliott on Thursday morning. He was to put the request for support to the Board. We are still waiting for their response."

The Yes Campaign remain silent on the issue. Perhaps they would like to explain exactly how this new form of government would be elected in a way that will prevent single party domination.

The Government has confirmed that the correction on the cost of local reorganisation will be going out to 220,000 Durham homes on 27th September ( it still hasn't been confirmed by the Royal Mail that they have received the correction letters from the ODPM. Perhaps they are still in the post).

ENDS

Contact
Neil Herron
Campaign Director
North East No Campaign
Frederick Street
Sunderland Tel 0191 565 7143
http://www.northeastnocampaign.co.uk/

NOTES:

'Have Your Say Leaflet' Statement..." The Government intends that a North East Assembly would consist of around 25 elected members to represent different views and parts of the region. They would be elected - as in Scotland, Wales and London - by a system of proportional representation to help prevent domination by a single party and to help ensure a balance of opinion. Elections would be held every four years."

North East No Campaign asked for it to be replaced with, " The Government intends that a North East Assembly would consist of around 25 elected members to represent different views and parts of the region. The majority of members representing individual constituencies will be elected by 'the first past the post' system, with a minority being elected from regional lists to ensure that the overall representation in an assembly is broadly representative of the votes cast. Elections would be held every four years."

This is the precise wording taken from the Government's own document (see below)

DOCUMENTS:

Proposed Statutory Guidance to the Electoral Commisssion

North East No Campaign Judicial Review Application


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

What a carve up.
First we have the abominable ruling of The Electoral Commission selecting NESNO as official publicly funded group to head "?NO Campaign?". Thus we have a group of Conservatives with Ukip support, who up to the day of being awarded the funds have not held a campaign meeting in the NE, getting £100,000 to obstruct the people's campaign. So much for impartiality of the EC.

Now we have the government using it's financial might, using our taxes, to prevent proper expossure of lying and cheating in printed electoral leaflets in order to mislead the electorate. The Electoral Commission did not insist on the government correcting the misleading and untue information.

Now we have the judiciary joining in what appears a conert party of assasins of democracy. One has to ask on what grounds could a judge rule in such a way, knowing very well that such a ruling would let the government get away with openly misleading the electorate. Is the name of the judge known?

If that was not enough we have to add the non participation in the court action and indeed no offer of financial help by the NESNO group.

Faced with this even a cynic like me will start believing in conspiracy theories.

Anonymous Michael JO

Blog Archive


only search Neil Herron Blog