Wednesday, October 20, 2004

NESNO and No Campaign asked to leave debate

In a bizarre state of affairs a debate was held today in the Priestman Buildings at Sunderland University.

First up was Doug Stewart, Head of Referendums at the Electoral Commission. We (at the No Campaign) had contacted John Elliott of NESNO to say that we would be there to offer him moral support. His debate was to begin at 12 noon, versus Julie Elliott of GMB who we had crossed swords with the night before.

John was running late and Colin Moran and I arrived at 11.30am just in time to ask Doug a few difficult questions of the Electoral Commission.

Doug, "Could you help fill in the four ballot papers that I have received?"

Doug, "Could you tell me why the Electoral Commission information packs arrived late?"

We were aware that they had also suffered printing problems similar to those they had witnessed during the shambolic European elections. Obviously an organisation funded with £41m of public money had not saw fit to make contingency plans either.

Doug passed the buck on the Ballot Papers and said it was the Returning Officers problem. How did Herron get four BP's?

John arrived and was told that a local Conservative was taking his place. We sat at the back chatting not realising that there was a drama taking place at the front.

Julie Elliott, GMB and Yes Campaign speaker, was on the phone to head office to say that the No Campaign had 'infiltrated the audience. Hardly undercover as we were the only ones who had suits on and had given the game away with our bald heads, but we were about to be asked to leave the debate otherwise she would'nt speak.

What Julie hadn't realised that because John wasn't speaking we had decided to go to our office, plus the BBC had just called to expose the four Ballot Paper scandal and they were coming as well.

Lead assembly story on the Assembly debate on BBC was ours...No campaign gets four ballot papers, exposing the all postal ballot fiasco.

Further revelations will be in the Sunderland Echo and Newcastle Journal tomorrow, and this week's Mail on Sunday.

2 comments:

Jenny Sleep said...

Comments below are from the BBC Tyne message board: http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/h2/h2.cgi?x=y&board=england.tyne&sort=D&state=threads

Shouldn't the Electoral Commission/Returning Officer tell people that if they are going to put their ballot papers in the bin, they should first rip them up?

"My parents threw away their postal votes and refuse to have any thing to do with this system (I'm tempted to do the same) as they see it as undemocratic and open to abuse. Why were postal palots introduced? was it to encourage the lazy to vote? I know a lot of people who have voted all their lives who will have nothing to do with this system. So they have now lost their right to vote only to be replaced by the apothetic and lazy."

"I know two couples who have put their postal vote in the bin. I have been asked by elderly relatives what to do and who should they vote for and would I fill in the forms? I suggested they put them in the bin as well. People have fought wars for the right to vote in secret without fear of anyone knowing whom or what they voted for. Now using a simple bar code the computers will tell our rulers everything they need to know about the vote."

"People are entitled to become slightly hysterical when voting on an important matter is to be conducted using the discredited all-postal voting system (which no-one else is going to use). When this system was used in Gateshead I received voting papers for other people, which I took to their houses. Someone unscrupulous could have used them to maximise their own vote. Also, the local paper reported that a pile of voting papers was found in the entrance to a block of flats. Why are we mugs chosen to use this dodgy system?"

Anonymous said...

Why are we mugs chosen to use this dodgy system?"

Because Bliar, Presclott et al still think that we will follow them like sheep!

Blog Archive


only search Neil Herron Blog