Discussion:
Leave.EU fined £70k, turning bitchy.
(too old to reply)
pensive hamster
2018-05-11 16:21:01 UTC
Permalink
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-leave-eu-fined-70000-electoral-law-arron-banks-referendum-a8346176.html
11 May 2018
'Police are examining evidence that the chief executive of a key
organisation that pushed for Brexit committed criminal offences
during 2016 referendum campaign.

'It comes after the Electoral Commission fined Leave.EU – the
group backed by Nigel Farage and funded by Arron Banks – the
maximum £70,000 for multiple breaches of electoral rules.

'The group failed to include at least £77,380 in its spending return
following the national vote, meaning it exceeding the legal spending
limits ahead of the referendum, in which the country backed leaving
the European Union.

'... Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Banks called
the Commission’s findings a “joke”, and vowed to fight them in the
courts and claimed the Commission was trying strip the referendum
result of credibility.

'He said: “The entire Commission is composed of former MPs,
Liberal MPs, the SNP, former Labour leaders of councils – all sorts
of people that believe in Remain.

'... A statement from Leave.EU built on the theme, branding the
Commission “a ‘Blairite Swamp Creation’ packed full of
establishment ‘Remoaners’ that couldn’t quite make it to the House
of Lords, but managed to get their noses in the trough via
appointment to public bodies like the Electoral Commission”.

Handbags at dawn?
tim...
2018-05-11 17:09:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by pensive hamster
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-leave-eu-fined-70000-electoral-law-arron-banks-referendum-a8346176.html
11 May 2018
'Police are examining evidence that the chief executive of a key
organisation that pushed for Brexit committed criminal offences
during 2016 referendum campaign.
'It comes after the Electoral Commission fined Leave.EU – the
group backed by Nigel Farage and funded by Arron Banks – the
maximum £70,000 for multiple breaches of electoral rules.
'The group failed to include at least £77,380 in its spending return
following the national vote, meaning it exceeding the legal spending
limits ahead of the referendum, in which the country backed leaving
the European Union.
'... Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Banks called
the Commission’s findings a “joke”, and vowed to fight them in the
courts and claimed the Commission was trying strip the referendum
result of credibility.
he was on DP later and made the credible point that his "forensic"
accountant had shown that they are wrong and as such he intended to
challenge the fine in court.

without being bitchy at all

tim
R. Mark Clayton
2018-05-11 17:22:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by pensive hamster
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-leave-eu-fined-70000-electoral-law-arron-banks-referendum-a8346176.html
11 May 2018
'Police are examining evidence that the chief executive of a key
organisation that pushed for Brexit committed criminal offences
during 2016 referendum campaign.
'It comes after the Electoral Commission fined Leave.EU – the
group backed by Nigel Farage and funded by Arron Banks – the
maximum £70,000 for multiple breaches of electoral rules.
'The group failed to include at least £77,380 in its spending return
following the national vote, meaning it exceeding the legal spending
limits ahead of the referendum, in which the country backed leaving
the European Union.
'... Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Banks called
the Commission’s findings a “joke”, and vowed to fight them in the
courts and claimed the Commission was trying strip the referendum
result of credibility.
he was on DP later and made the credible point that his "forensic"
accountant had shown that they are wrong and as such he intended to
challenge the fine in court.
without being bitchy at all
tim
Did the Leave campaign lie and cheat? Who would have thought it.

PS NHS is still waiting for its cheque for £33.6 Billion unpaid so far...
Norman Wells
2018-05-11 17:28:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Did the Leave campaign lie and cheat? Who would have thought it.
PS NHS is still waiting for its cheque for £33.6 Billion unpaid so far...
Just two questions for you. Where was that money supposed to come from?
And when's the earliest it could possibly become available?
R. Mark Clayton
2018-05-11 17:33:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Norman Wells
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Did the Leave campaign lie and cheat? Who would have thought it.
PS NHS is still waiting for its cheque for £33.6 Billion unpaid so far...
Just two questions for you. Where was that money supposed to come from?
Gross money paid to the EU.
Post by Norman Wells
And when's the earliest it could possibly become available?
Never.
Norman Wells
2018-05-11 17:36:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Norman Wells
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Did the Leave campaign lie and cheat? Who would have thought it.
PS NHS is still waiting for its cheque for £33.6 Billion unpaid so far...
Just two questions for you. Where was that money supposed to come from?
Gross money paid to the EU.
Which we're still paying because we're members of the EU.
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Norman Wells
And when's the earliest it could possibly become available?
Never.
Then it can't be available now, and it can't be 'unpaid', can it?
Ian Jackson
2018-05-11 19:02:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Norman Wells
Which we're still paying because we're members of the EU.
Yes - you're right. There's no chance of any EU payments being diverted
to the NHS until we've stopped paying our EU subs.

Also, I can't imagine what the final cost of leaving the EU will end up
being. It must be mounting up second-by-second (a lot of paper clips and
staples will certainly be being consumed). Almost certainly we'll have
to wait until we've recovered from settling all the bills incurred en
route.
--
Ian
tim...
2018-05-12 08:12:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Norman Wells
Which we're still paying because we're members of the EU.
Yes - you're right. There's no chance of any EU payments being diverted to
the NHS until we've stopped paying our EU subs.
and no-one promised otherwise
Also, I can't imagine what the final cost of leaving the EU will end up
being. It must be mounting up second-by-second (a lot of paper clips and
staples will certainly be being consumed). Almost certainly we'll have to
wait until we've recovered from settling all the bills incurred en route.
we seem to have negotiated a bill of 40 billion

what makes you think that will not be the case?

tim
Ophelia
2018-05-11 19:13:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Norman Wells
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Did the Leave campaign lie and cheat? Who would have thought it.
PS NHS is still waiting for its cheque for £33.6 Billion unpaid so far...
Just two questions for you. Where was that money supposed to come from?
Gross money paid to the EU.
Which we're still paying because we're members of the EU.
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Norman Wells
And when's the earliest it could possibly become available?
Never.
Then it can't be available now, and it can't be 'unpaid', can it?

==

lol
tim...
2018-05-11 17:36:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by pensive hamster
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-leave-eu-fined-70000-electoral-law-arron-banks-referendum-a8346176.html
11 May 2018
'Police are examining evidence that the chief executive of a key
organisation that pushed for Brexit committed criminal offences
during 2016 referendum campaign.
'It comes after the Electoral Commission fined Leave.EU – the
group backed by Nigel Farage and funded by Arron Banks – the
maximum £70,000 for multiple breaches of electoral rules.
'The group failed to include at least £77,380 in its spending return
following the national vote, meaning it exceeding the legal spending
limits ahead of the referendum, in which the country backed leaving
the European Union.
'... Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Banks called
the Commission’s findings a “joke”, and vowed to fight them in the
courts and claimed the Commission was trying strip the referendum
result of credibility.
he was on DP later and made the credible point that his "forensic"
accountant had shown that they are wrong and as such he intended to
challenge the fine in court.
without being bitchy at all
tim
Did the Leave campaign lie and cheat? Who would have thought it.
this was purely about how they declared the amount of money that they spent

and Remain lied and cheated just as much
Post by R. Mark Clayton
PS NHS is still waiting for its cheque for £33.6 Billion unpaid so far...
No, that wasn't the promise at all

tim
Norman Wells
2018-05-11 17:45:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Did the Leave campaign lie and cheat?  Who would have thought it.
this was purely about how they declared the amount of money that they spent
and Remain lied and cheated just as much
PS NHS is still waiting for its cheque for £33.6 Billion unpaid so far...
No, that wasn't the promise at all
You don't really expect thicko Remainers to understand that, do you?
Ian Jackson
2018-05-11 18:44:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Did the Leave campaign lie and cheat? Who would have thought it.
To be honest, even if Leave.EU WERE rather over-enthusiastic, I don't
think it would have influenced the vote much more than if they played
strictly in accordance with the rules. In the end, they were probably
pushing at an open door, and their extra efforts were not really
required.

Following those five MPs in strong North East Leave constituencies
declaring that they feared for the industries and prosperity in their
areas, and that we should have a vote on the Brexit deal, members of the
public - when interviewed by the BBC local news - to a man and woman
still immediately insisted that we should leave.
--
Ian
GB
2018-05-11 17:24:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by pensive hamster
'... Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Banks called
the Commission’s findings a “joke”, and vowed to fight them in the
courts and claimed the Commission was trying strip the referendum
result of credibility.
he was on DP later and made the credible point that his "forensic"
accountant had shown that they are wrong and as such he intended to
challenge the fine in court.
without being bitchy at all
It seems pretty odd for Mr Banks to claim "the Commission was trying
[to] strip the referendum result of credibility". The Commission's job
is to check the rules are being complied with. Mr Banks can reasonably
claim that the Commission is wrong in their assessment, and for all I
know he may be right.

But, for him to attribute a false motive for them going about the job
they have been given says a lot about his mental state and even more
about the gullibility he attributes to the public. As far as I know, he
has not a single shred of evidence for his allegation.
Post by tim...
tim
Yellow
2018-05-11 20:37:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by GB
Post by tim...
'... Speaking on BBC Radio 4?s Today programme, Mr Banks called
the Commission?s findings a ?joke?, and vowed to fight them in the
courts and claimed the Commission was trying strip the referendum
result of credibility.
he was on DP later and made the credible point that his "forensic"
accountant had shown that they are wrong and as such he intended to
challenge the fine in court.
without being bitchy at all
It seems pretty odd for Mr Banks to claim "the Commission was trying
[to] strip the referendum result of credibility". The Commission's job
is to check the rules are being complied with. Mr Banks can reasonably
claim that the Commission is wrong in their assessment, and for all I
know he may be right.
His claim on DP was that the person in charge of the Commission is
politically biased as he is a staunch remainer and has made comments
along the lines that leaving the EU is stupid.
Post by GB
But, for him to attribute a false motive for them going about the job
they have been given says a lot about his mental state and even more
about the gullibility he attributes to the public. As far as I know, he
has not a single shred of evidence for his allegation.
Again referring to his DP interview, he argued that they had prepared a
monster document refuting the Commission's charges against them but that
the Commission took just 3 days to dismiss it out of hand and to come
back with exactly the same charges.

As Tim has already said, the refuting seems to centre on leave.EU taking
legal advice before they submitting the accounts and they therefore
claim they were in fact strictly within the law.

Will be interesting if Banks, on reflection, does as he says and takes
it to court.
GB
2018-05-11 20:50:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yellow
Again referring to his DP interview, he argued that they had prepared a
monster document refuting the Commission's charges against them but that
the Commission took just 3 days to dismiss it out of hand and to come
back with exactly the same charges.
So, the Commission didn't think much of his arguments... Does that mean
they are biased or his arguments are crap? He is saying that 3 whole
days can't possibly have been enough to consider the documents he
submitted? It makes me think that there are really only two possibilities:

a) His documents were crap, and it only took a short time for the
Commission to work that out, or

b) They are so utterly biased that they didn't even seriously consider
his submission.
Post by Yellow
As Tim has already said, the refuting seems to centre on leave.EU taking
legal advice before they submitting the accounts and they therefore
claim they were in fact strictly within the law.
Or, their legal advice was complete crap? Or the Commission thinks it's
crap? Either way, that could explain why the Commission didn't need long
to think about it.
Post by Yellow
Will be interesting if Banks, on reflection, does as he says and takes
it to court.
I agree. If you are interested in betting, I'd give 5:1 on the
commission being right.
GB
2018-05-11 21:07:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by GB
b) They are so utterly biased that they didn't even seriously consider
his submission.
Sorry, I mean they the commission ...
Yellow
2018-05-11 23:15:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by GB
Post by Yellow
Again referring to his DP interview, he argued that they had prepared a
monster document refuting the Commission's charges against them but that
the Commission took just 3 days to dismiss it out of hand and to come
back with exactly the same charges.
So, the Commission didn't think much of his arguments... Does that mean
they are biased or his arguments are crap? He is saying that 3 whole
days can't possibly have been enough to consider the documents he
a) His documents were crap, and it only took a short time for the
Commission to work that out, or
b) They are so utterly biased that they didn't even seriously consider
his submission.
I do not know any more than you do and was just reporting what Banks
said.
Post by GB
Post by Yellow
As Tim has already said, the refuting seems to centre on leave.EU taking
legal advice before they submitting the accounts and they therefore
claim they were in fact strictly within the law.
Or, their legal advice was complete crap? Or the Commission thinks it's
crap? Either way, that could explain why the Commission didn't need long
to think about it.
Again, I just reported what Banks said when interviewed and he was very
calm and very earnest but clearly quite upset but not in a "they caught
me out" kind of way but instead came across as someone who thought the
had done what he needed to do.

But he might just be a good actor.
Post by GB
Post by Yellow
Will be interesting if Banks, on reflection, does as he says and takes
it to court.
I agree. If you are interested in betting, I'd give 5:1 on the
commission being right.
I am happy just to sit back and watch the passing parade.
tim...
2018-05-12 08:14:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by GB
Post by Yellow
Again referring to his DP interview, he argued that they had prepared a
monster document refuting the Commission's charges against them but that
the Commission took just 3 days to dismiss it out of hand and to come
back with exactly the same charges.
So, the Commission didn't think much of his arguments... Does that mean
they are biased or his arguments are crap? He is saying that 3 whole days
can't possibly have been enough to consider the documents he submitted? It
a) His documents were crap, and it only took a short time for the
Commission to work that out, or
b) They are so utterly biased that they didn't even seriously consider his
submission.
they don't need to be biased to do that

they just need to be lazy

tim

Fredxx
2018-05-11 21:12:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yellow
Post by GB
Post by tim...
'... Speaking on BBC Radio 4?s Today programme, Mr Banks called
the Commission?s findings a ?joke?, and vowed to fight them in the
courts and claimed the Commission was trying strip the referendum
result of credibility.
he was on DP later and made the credible point that his "forensic"
accountant had shown that they are wrong and as such he intended to
challenge the fine in court.
without being bitchy at all
It seems pretty odd for Mr Banks to claim "the Commission was trying
[to] strip the referendum result of credibility". The Commission's job
is to check the rules are being complied with. Mr Banks can reasonably
claim that the Commission is wrong in their assessment, and for all I
know he may be right.
His claim on DP was that the person in charge of the Commission is
politically biased as he is a staunch remainer and has made comments
along the lines that leaving the EU is stupid.
Post by GB
But, for him to attribute a false motive for them going about the job
they have been given says a lot about his mental state and even more
about the gullibility he attributes to the public. As far as I know, he
has not a single shred of evidence for his allegation.
Again referring to his DP interview, he argued that they had prepared a
monster document refuting the Commission's charges against them but that
the Commission took just 3 days to dismiss it out of hand and to come
back with exactly the same charges.
To me, the very fact he produced so many documents that it should take
more than 3 days to go through, I would find the argument immediately
suspect. Death by BS.
Post by Yellow
As Tim has already said, the refuting seems to centre on leave.EU taking
legal advice before they submitting the accounts and they therefore
claim they were in fact strictly within the law.
3 days of argument?
Post by Yellow
Will be interesting if Banks, on reflection, does as he says and takes
it to court.
Quite.
harry
2018-05-12 05:36:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by pensive hamster
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-leave-eu-fined-70000-electoral-law-arron-banks-referendum-a8346176.html
11 May 2018
'Police are examining evidence that the chief executive of a key
organisation that pushed for Brexit committed criminal offences
during 2016 referendum campaign.
'It comes after the Electoral Commission fined Leave.EU – the
group backed by Nigel Farage and funded by Arron Banks – the
maximum £70,000 for multiple breaches of electoral rules.
'The group failed to include at least £77,380 in its spending return
following the national vote, meaning it exceeding the legal spending
limits ahead of the referendum, in which the country backed leaving
the European Union.
'... Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Banks called
the Commission’s findings a “joke”, and vowed to fight them in the
courts and claimed the Commission was trying strip the referendum
result of credibility.
'He said: “The entire Commission is composed of former MPs,
Liberal MPs, the SNP, former Labour leaders of councils – all sorts
of people that believe in Remain.
'... A statement from Leave.EU built on the theme, branding the
Commission “a ‘Blairite Swamp Creation’ packed full of
establishment ‘Remoaners’ that couldn’t quite make it to the House
of Lords, but managed to get their noses in the trough via
appointment to public bodies like the Electoral Commission”.
Handbags at dawn?
I wonder if they considered the £7,000,000 cost of the leaflet the government had shoved through all our doors?
Loading...