If you told someone in politics in 2016 that Rob Ford and Matt Goodwin would be play very prominent roles in a future by-election - they would correctly guess that Farage was doing well in the polls but would be surprised by the details!
I had actually thought of messaging you about it when I saw that leaflet, but then I thought you'd hear about it anyway. The silver lining is that I discovered this blog (and probably many others).
You seem a lot more concerned about your own words being misrepresented (which is something that happens to almost anyone with a public profile all the time, frankly, and is pretty much standard practice for our beloved newspapers) than the actual breaking of electoral law. I get that its annoying to have your words taken out of context, but surely you must have that happen to you every other week? I can't believe this is the first time it has happened.
My proposal to save paper and the sanity of both the electorate and the daft volunteers who deliver the leaflets is that each candidate should be allowed to produce one A4 sized leaflet only, and these must include the name of the candidate, a photo and brief bio, a bullet list of key policy proposals, and a paragraph on why they deserve your vote. No criticism of any other party or candidate to be allowed. The leaflet can only say what their party plan to do. All the leaflets will be distributed together in a pack, along with a breakdown of what the incumbent achieved - based on the bullet points from their previous election leaflet.
This last requirement should discourage over-promising and keep candidates grounded.
That way everybody gets the same information presented in the same format and are spared the nonsense described in this article.
If you told someone in politics in 2016 that Rob Ford and Matt Goodwin would be play very prominent roles in a future by-election - they would correctly guess that Farage was doing well in the polls but would be surprised by the details!
Impact case study - done.
I had actually thought of messaging you about it when I saw that leaflet, but then I thought you'd hear about it anyway. The silver lining is that I discovered this blog (and probably many others).
Very disappointing that Returning Officer does not intervene. Something wrong in law here
You seem a lot more concerned about your own words being misrepresented (which is something that happens to almost anyone with a public profile all the time, frankly, and is pretty much standard practice for our beloved newspapers) than the actual breaking of electoral law. I get that its annoying to have your words taken out of context, but surely you must have that happen to you every other week? I can't believe this is the first time it has happened.
My proposal to save paper and the sanity of both the electorate and the daft volunteers who deliver the leaflets is that each candidate should be allowed to produce one A4 sized leaflet only, and these must include the name of the candidate, a photo and brief bio, a bullet list of key policy proposals, and a paragraph on why they deserve your vote. No criticism of any other party or candidate to be allowed. The leaflet can only say what their party plan to do. All the leaflets will be distributed together in a pack, along with a breakdown of what the incumbent achieved - based on the bullet points from their previous election leaflet.
This last requirement should discourage over-promising and keep candidates grounded.
That way everybody gets the same information presented in the same format and are spared the nonsense described in this article.
Will Ramadan be a factor too?