Are Eastleigh Borough Lib Dem’s Playing Fair This Election?

[jtonline (James Taylor)]

I am definitely not an expert but I think this is about spending public money on things which could reasonably be seen as campaigning

Example 1 - Woodland destruction

The council’s news item on this looks fine to me. Is there something else the council did to promote a candidate or candidates?

Example 2 - Horton Heath Politically Controversial Issue

I had thought the date might exempt this (I think it was before the statement of persons nominated) but the date on the LGA FAQ seems to be earlier than that. This seems like the most suspect example to me.

Example 3 - Allington Lane

If it wasn’t for the wording in that letter, I would personally have said the Allington Lane example was ok. Their usual squabbling might have crossed the line though.

Publish factual information to counteract misleading, controversial or extreme - for example, racist/sexist information. An example might be a media story which is critical of the council, such as a media enquiry claiming that the salaries of all the council’s senior managers have increased by five per cent. If this is not true, a response such as ‘none of the council’s senior management team have received any increase in salary in the last 12 months’ is acceptable. It is perfectly right and proper that the council responds, as long as it is factual.

Example 4 - Hedge End, West End, Botley & Local Facebook Group

I don’t think this has anything to do with the pre-election period but is actually really interesting. I hadn’t even realised that group existed - it’s not the biggest in Hedge End. It looks like he’s “only” a moderator, and I don’t see why he shouldn’t be if he’s open about it.

I can see why it might be nice to mention on a register of interests though. It would be interesting to see if there are any examples of councillors adding that kind of thing- I’ll ask around.

Example 5 - Local Plan Update

Local Plan Update

It does seem like a suspiciously timed update at first glance, especially given the topic. Having said that, the guidance does say that you are allowed to… publish factual information to counteract misleading, controversial or extreme (for example, racist/sexist) information That doesn’t seem completely unreasonable given the recent speculation about Allington. It certainly seems worth asking the question about whether the statement stepped over the line though. Unfortunately, it’s not the …

Summary

I personally think there is room for improvement and it might be worth taking some of the examples further, but it doesn’t quite seem on the same league as some other examples around.

@adam

Is this right that the candidates can make social media posts without any imprint?

I really like that some candidates have carried over the imprint to social media but I get the impression that the rules really haven’t kept up with society unfortunately.

@DazzaRPD

And while I mention Paul, is it fair that he’s publically backing the Conservatives and is seen out and about with them while being an Eastleigh MP and thus representing all of us?

Seems fine to me, why shouldn’t he campaign for his party’s candidates? It would be different if he used government resources, like the new Downing Street briefing room, to do it but he hasn’t as far as I’ve seen.

@adam

I don’t think we can just say “oh it’s ok it’s politics”, because that way the conversation will never improve and politics will be forever locked in a downward spiral of reduced engagement and “they’re all the same”. I think we need to hold people accountable for a better level of conversation.

100%

@DazzaRPD

The way forward is to vote.

This!