UKIP Hyndburn Break Electoral Guidelines

When operating within the confines of specific guidelines it is important to follow the rules very closely, especially if you are new to the game and wishing to make a long lasting and professional stance.

Unfortunately, once again, UKIP seem to flaunt these rules that have been put in place by doing what they want, when they want and where they want. After the last blog exposed the unethical way Ribble Valley UKIP used an address to defraud the public via misrepresentation of political office it would seem in the next ward things aren't much better.

For starters; any political party advertisement should be no closer to the polling station than 100 metres. If the polling station has a path leading upto it then the 100m limit starts from there. The picture below shows a UKIP static board on a scaffold rig no more than 25 metres from the door, literally at the start to the path leading upto it:

This is in breach of the Electoral Commission's Guidance for Candidates and Agents para 1.36 which can be found here: Electoral Commission guidelines

That guideline was also breached at a second polling station in the town of Great Harwood by the presence of UKIP at the polls. The man photographed stood on the door of the polling station is the driver of the vehicle and the candidate was present inside, upon me taking the picture the man on the door hurried inside and they left hastily.

I can understand that UKIP are a new party in respect to their lack of experience yet the rules have been broken again as this overly eager party tried to secure votes.

This information has been uploaded as it is a matter of public interest, all relevant authorities are being informed in due course.

If you have experienced similar in your area, regardless of which party, please get in contact and help expose the lack of ethics some hold in democratic procedures.

Find this blog useful? Please ReTweet RT this blog!

UKIP and the Misleading Address

As we are all aware the General Election is upon us and many of us will rally behind one political group or another. What many won't think of is the validity of some of these political groups in the way that they conduct themselves locally. This in itself can help the public decide whether voting for that specific group in your area is beneficial for the social environment and community. 

My story starts off innocent enough, I wished to return unwanted leaflets to the address provided on them. What I soon discovered is there was something afoot upon speaking to the tenant at the address. All was captured by a recording, present in the video below, but the story continues from there and is the reason I write this blog...

So the female tenant openly claims to know nothing of the UKIP perspective parliamentary candidate but does mumble something about her dad's boss owning the property... Still though, not offering any answers on how to contact the candidate but did mention "calling dad" to resolve the matter.

Sure enough I found this to be a little strange and forwarded onto the council to investigate who in turn contacted the police. Not submitting the video initially but in due course. The police came and had a chat informing me that the building is owned by a UKIP donor and that they had spoke with the candidate plus those involved, telling me that the relevant people could now be contacted via this address.

The local Conservatives broke the story to the press and it appeared in the Lancashire Telegraph: http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/ribble_valley/12927606.___I___ve_broken_no_rules_____says_UKIP_address_row_candidate/

She makes reference within that article that she "can't afford to fork out for a political office" to which she could use the regional one like many other parties do. She also claims to have strong links to the Ribble Valley so perhaps she knows the tenant, who's address she has been using, very well? Read on and let's see...

Same day as the article in the Telegraph was published she posted on Facebook a post that was sure to set the record straight.. To which I replied:

As can be seen my concern is for the innocent tenant, that young female on the video who admitted she pays the rent and is the resident. Now I expected a great response to this but in actual fact I received this back:

That's right, she informs me that the tenant at the address IS NOT female. So she clearly hasn't the first idea who lives there or who is potentially being subjected to the alleged "death threats" she proclaims to be receiving.

Personally I don't think she is receiving but deceiving... the local residents, by using this address to appear to be as local as local can be, even the introduction on the latest election leaflet is wrote in such a way as to coerce people into her false sense of local living arrangements.

THE FACEBOOK COMMENTS HAVE NOW BEEN REMOVED - What is she trying to hide?

I ask any people who wish to contact your local UKIP PPC to not attend the address and place the tenant under any more unwanted stress. It has become apparent that this political group wishes to sink its claws into votes by any means possible, the complaint has been taken up with the Electoral Commission and if anyone else finds this matter in serious breach of ethics then you could also report it.

Please check the authenticity of all parliamentary candidates before you vote, if they lie now imagine them with a little bit of political power... Doesn't bare thinking.

Keep safe and vote sensibly.  

Found this blog useful? Please ReTweet it here: https://twitter.com/HarryHasToSay/status/595181596564705280