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.
*******
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment