Spotlight getting brighter...Electoral Commssion getting piles from sitting on the fence

Another sample of a complaint with a different line of questioning appears below:-

The Electoral Commission's Douglas Stewart has failed so far to answer the questions put to him last Thursday.

We have received no reasons as to why North East No Campaign was not suitable.

Ask yourself how a decision could be made to give £100k to the following:-

-NESNO has no speaking engagements planned.

-NESNO's website is an insult to anyone who wishes to become informed about an elected regional assembly or the referendum. If you want to check it out click here. Then check out ours click here . For contact details of the Electoral Commission should you wish to challenge or question their decision please click here.

Remember that if you are not prepared to speak out, do not complain when there is no-one left to speak for you.

Dear Mr Crawford

I note that the Commission's press release announcing the designation of North East Says No Ltd as the lead 'No' campaigner in the forthcoming referendum on the setting up of a regional assembly in the North East makes no mention of the alternative applicant North East No; and gives no explanation as to why North East Says No better met the Commission's criteria for designation.

I am minded to lodge a complaint about this but would not wish to do so without hearing both sides of the argument. I shall therefore be grateful if you will advise:

1 On what grounds the decision was taken?

2 Whether the Commission's decision was in line with the recommendation of its officials; and if not, on what grounds it overruled them?

3 Whether the submission of North East Says No was unambiguous in opposing the principle of setting up a regional assembly, or merely opposed to a council with the powers as now intended rather than to the principle of creating regional assemblies?

Whether members of the Commission with connections with (i) Rowntree Trust; and (ii) public sector jobs and board memberships, both of which might be considered 'parti pris' participated in the discussion and/or voted on the decision?


I note from the press release that, "If there is more than one applicant to be designated applicant for each outcome, The Electoral Commission is able to designate whichever of the applicants appears to us to represent the greatest extent those campaigning for the relevant outcome." In the nature of law governing the conduct of public bodies, and especially so in the case of the Electoral Commission, which occupies a position akin to Caesar's wife in this respect, the words 'appears to us' are conditioned by implicit requirements - 'on the evidence of the facts' and 'by exercise of objective disinterested judgement' . It is not clear to me how the well-established, highly organised North East No campaign led by of Mr Herron, with his track record for success in promoting understanding of public interest political questions could be rejected in favour of Nesno Ltd, which (as I understand matters) is linked to a political party with a weak or negative profile in the region and no track record for effective campaigning. An online search for NESNO this morning on my computer (for example) did not produce a link to that organisation - or even their Conservative party sponsors - but did provide a link to North East No. QED - I think.

I look forward to receiving a response, on the basis of which I shall decide whether a complain is justified, and if so whether it should be to the Commission or about the conduct of the Commission.

Yours sincerely

Stephen Howarth