Tom Gordon: The problems with the LibDems' election spending
It’s tough being special. Smart kids get bullied, peacocks attracts crows, and the Liberal Democrats are the dew-eyed victims of baseless smears. That, at least, is how how the party and Edinburgh West MP Christine Jardine have been defending themselves after a Herald investigation into general election spending. A quick disclaimer. I’ve known Ms Jardine since she tutored me in journalism 20 years ago, and I’ve chatted amicably with her at LibDem conferences ever since. I like her. But the evidence is what it is.
Checking official candidate returns is part of newspaper routine after elections. I’ve spent many a ham-hardening hour in council offices sifting invoices and punching a calculator in search of the newsworthy. Sometimes it’s quirky, like the MP who hired an ice cream van to campaign in, and sometimes it’s prosaic, like who spent what where. Parties pretend they fight for every seat, but by their budgets shall ye know them, and the returns tell all.
After June’s election, it was the LibDems’ specialness that stood out. The party seemed to have worked a kind of political alchemy, spending thousands on leaflets that somehow didn’t count against the local limits imposed to ensure a fair fight. The formula was to call large chunks of the spending “national”. Only local spending is deemed to have promoted the candidate. National spending, which promotes the party in general, is accounted for separately.
... In North East Fife, LibDem Elizabeth Riches was £432 under the spending limit - after disregarding £2000 of costs as national. She came just two votes behind the SNP winner. In Caithness, MP Jamie Stone said £2200 of costs were national, although he was well short of the spending cap. And in Edinburgh West, scene of one of the nastiest fights of the election, Ms Jardine stayed £1680 under the limit after assigning £3000 of costs to the national effort, rather than the local onslaught.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/15483254.Tom_Gordon__The_problems_with_the_LibDems__election_spending
= new reply since forum marked as read