Tuesday 11 September 2018

Speak Up Mr Rana!

by Les May


ALTHOUGH it took place a month ago I have only just got round to looking at what Faisal Rana had to say to Sky News about the police caution when he was caught voting twice in the local election last May.


The bit that caught my eye was when he said:

I legally registered my votes by providing my genuine national insurance number, date of birth and addresses and when I received these through the post I thought it would have been OK and that is why they issued me two ballots for two constituencies’.

Now it looks to me that here there is more than a hint that he is trying to shift the blame onto the people at Rochdale MBC who run the electoral process.  Is there a suggestion here that someone at Rochdale MBC should have spotted that two national insurance number and two dates of birth on separate registration documents were identical, and told him that applying for two votes was illegal?

Now my recollection is that registering to take part in the ballot is an active process.  You have to provide an address at you are resident in order to receive a ballot paper at that address.  Ditto for a postal vote. I assume that Mr Rana is quite properly registered at the address at which he resides permanently with his family and that he legitimately used that vote in that ward.  But what about the ‘other’ address which I assume was in the ward in which he stood as a candidate.  What legitimate interest did Mr Rana have in that address which made him think that he had a right to register himself at that address and apply for a postal vote to be sent to that address?

The interview Mr Rana gave to Sky News offers no explanation. In the absence of any explanation we, the voters of Rochdale, are left in the dark about the mechanism by a sitting councillor fraudulently obtained a second vote.  In the circumstances I think there are a few questions that we can expect Mr Rana to answer:

What was the address used by Mr Rana to apply for a second vote?

What legitimate interest did Mr Rana have in that address?

Was Mr Rana a tenant at that address?

Was Mr Rana the owner of the property identified by that address?

On Wednesday 17 October there will be a full meeting of the Council.  If Mr Rana has not answered these questions by then I suggest that a member should put these questions to him and ask for an answer.
*******

No comments: