Will you be watching the results?

Chocolatelovinggran

Apologies, Cossy - my misunderstanding.

No need to apologise, I should have been clearer

Having poll clerked for 25 years it was quite usual for the Presiding Officer to go into the booth with someone who needed help

Iam64

MayBee70

Primrose53

thenegotiator.co.uk/news/regulation-law-news/high-profile-green-party-figure-branded-property-hoarding-hypocrite/

To be fair to her in her speech I think she said that if people work hard they deserve to see the results of that endeavour ( I guess that means it’s ok to be aspirational but then again that was Baroness Warsi’s reason for being a Conservative).

What is the issue with this hard working young woman investing her money?
It’s not unusual for investment properties to be seen as a future pension.

I pondered on what I’d written and then started thinking about how rich the people in Reform and Restore ( especially Tice and Lowe) are, the ones that many of the electorate think want to govern the country to help the poor and underprivileged…

Graphite

Who had heard of this group until yesterday? Polling station staff and police say they saw no evidence of what it claimed was going on.

This was Reform tactics straight out of the Trump playbook to try to claim rigging. Are we supposed to believe there were hundreds of browbeaten Asian women, desperate to vote for Matt Goodwin and his anti-immigration agenda but their abusive husbands were strong arming them into voting Green, and this was observed hundreds of times?

This was a story pushed by Sam Coates for Sky who have been backing Reform throughout this campaign.

Reform need to admit they ran a bad candidate and a bad campaign. They won’t. They are in the business of blaming others, as they always do.

Oh sounds like Starmer then, blaming others Graphite

Reform need to admit they ran a bad candidate and a bad campaign. They won’t. They are in the business of blaming others, as they always do.

Nevertheless Reform doubled their vote from the 2024 GE

2024 - 5,142 - 14.1%

2026 - 10,578 - 28.7%

Oh sounds like Starmer then, blaming others

This tit for tat niggling is tedious.

DV took a tiny sample of no more than 1.5% of the total votes cast in G&D. They claim they saw 64 people (32 pairs) allegedly “family voting” out of a total of 36,814 votes counted.

They use terms like "highest levels of family voting" and "extremely high data" to describe what they observed.

Reform with great help from Sky’s Sam Coates have turned this into a circus because they are bad losers.

The ethnicity of these alleged family voters has not been stated but it’s alleged by Reform that Muslim women were being strong-armed by Muslim men into NOT voting for them, a party that maligns Muslims every single day.

It’s absurd.

Both Reform and Democratic Voters have not set out the evidence on which they rely to make their claims. Plus as you say Graphite DV observed so few voters overall, for short durations 30-45 minutes its preposterous to say this was "extremely high data" and little to low confidence in "data" as no methodology/ detailed evidence made clear.

Who funds the Democracy Volunteers?
Is it a new group?

Maremia

Who funds the Democracy Volunteers?
Is it a new group?

They’re a private limited company - not a charity for some reason. I know JosephRowntree Reform Trust has given them a grant. Founded in 2015/16

How were they able to stay in the polling station long enough to observe this so called "family voting"

Ilovecheese

How were they able to stay in the polling station long enough to observe this so called "family voting"

According to the report they published on Thursday evening the observers spent 30 - 45 minutes at each of the 22 polling stations they visited.

We don't know the affect of any votes that were cast as family votes many could have been changed from Labour. The majority of over 4000 was too big to be influenced, what matters is the future voting is done properly

That includes not making special allowances for "cultural sensitivities" we had enough of that in the sex grooming scandals. Whoever votes does it properly and polling stations are properly supervised.

David49

We don't know the affect of any votes that were cast as family votes many could have been changed from Labour. The majority of over 4000 was too big to be influenced, what matters is the future voting is done properly

That includes not making special allowances for "cultural sensitivities" we had enough of that in the sex grooming scandals. Whoever votes does it properly and polling stations are properly supervised.

"Cultural sensitivities" what a phrase, according to the Black Belt Barrister do not allow for breaking the Law in election voting. It is one rule for all, no matter what culture you are from.

We don’t yet know whether the law was broken, and if it was to what extent, that’s what the police investigation will reveal.

Casdon

We don’t yet know whether the law was broken, and if it was to what extent, that’s what the police investigation will reveal.

Yes of course. If it did happen, then something drastic needs to be done to stop it, 3 booths, 3 people only.

Democratic Volunteers say: Our mission is to improve the quality of democratic elections by advising those who legislate for, administer and oversee them. We do this to enhance them for the benefit of voters through non-partisan and empirical observation of the electoral process.

The way this is being spun furiously by Reform is that voters are deliberately doing something wrong when that mission statement is about ensuring that those who legislate, administer and oversee elections do this properly.

If the people working at polling stations did not do their jobs properly then that is for the authorities to deal with.

The way that this is being spun by the Daily Mail on behalf of Reform is truly vile.

DV claim that of the 32 cases (involving 64 people), of “family voting” that they saw over 17 hours observation, nine cases were at one polling station. That would be the obvious place to start for any enquiry as DV say they only spent 30-45 minutes at each station. The names of those on duty will, presumably, will be interviewed to discover why this happened.

In their press release, DV define “family voting” as “where two voters either confer, collude or direct each other on voting”. I wonder how they differentiate between people who are being given assistance to vote as the rules allow.

I don’t see how they can possibly know whether there is conference, collusion or direction unless they hear a conversation or can see body language in which case they would be intruding on privacy.

DV say “2023 saw the enactment of the Ballot Secrecy Act, which made the practice of family voting more clearly a breach of the secret ballot, making it more enforceable by staff in polling stations. Signage is now available to discourage the practice. Signage was only seen in 45% of the polling stations observed.”

DV do not say whether these signs were in place at the polling station where they claim to have seen the most “family voting”.

They also claim: “In Gorton and Denton, we observed “family voting” in 68% of polling stations, affecting 12% of those voters observed.”

The phrasing of that is odd and the percentage misleading.

They visited 22 of a total of 45 polling stations, say half, and observed 545 people casting their vote over the course of the day. They do not say how many voters they observed at each of the 22 polling stations visited.

They say they saw “family voting” in 15 of those 22 polling stations. That’s how they arrive at 68%. But they didn't go to the other 23 stations.

Nine cases at one polling station so only 23 cases over the the other 14 where they observed - not even two cases per station.

From this has been exploded this absurd story of sectarian voting.

The party engaged in political sectarianism is Reform. Again, the three core ingredient of political sectarianism are: othering, aversion and moralisation - something Reform MPs and it unelected spokepersons do every single day.

One of the issues I’m sure the police will be investigating is the impartiality of the volunteers who witnessed this happen.

David49

We don't know the affect of any votes that were cast as family votes many could have been changed from Labour. The majority of over 4000 was too big to be influenced, what matters is the future voting is done properly

That includes not making special allowances for "cultural sensitivities" we had enough of that in the sex grooming scandals. Whoever votes does it properly and polling stations are properly supervised.

Yes, exactly that!

Casdon

One of the issues I’m sure the police will be investigating is the impartiality of the volunteers who witnessed this happen.

Any volunteer around polling stations will have their own voting choices and opinions.

Oreo

Casdon

One of the issues I’m sure the police will be investigating is the impartiality of the volunteers who witnessed this happen.

Any volunteer around polling stations will have their own voting choices and opinions.

You misunderstood my meaning I think? If volunteers are politically motivated their reports may be inaccurate, to change the narrative. I’m not saying that happened, it will be one of the issues they will look at if accounts of the volunteers and the polling station workers about what happened vary.

Casdon

One of the issues I’m sure the police will be investigating is the impartiality of the volunteers who witnessed this happen.

Yes, exactly but that would be the extent of it, something amiss at one particular polling station; what two people DV volunteers claim they witnessed.

Foreign-born voters steal by-election blasts Farage, screams the Daily Mail. Straight out of the Trump playbook.

When your party spends every day vilifying migrants and people with brown skins; when you want to deport people who have leave to remain; when you want a brutal ICE-style force on the streets; don’t be surprised when the majority don’t vote for you.

I see Casdon thanks.

I don’t think the point is that ethnic minorities would have voted Reform but rather that the voting laws are being violated by some. If it was only five people doing it in one polling stations it would be too many.
A poster wrote that a police officer would be there, but I have never ever seen one in a polling station.
If the volunteers manning polling are turning a blind eye to this family voting thing then why?Are they afraid to speak out or are they the same ethnic minority so don’t see it as a problem?
Either way it sounds as if more robust measures need putting in place.The old excuse by the men that their families don’t understand English just won’t wash.

I have been a polling clerk. The police would call in, but not stay all day.

Ofcourse both Democracy Volunteers and polling station officials each have their own political views and values. However they all will be expected to be impartial when carrying out their roles. Both have a code of practise and conduct to abide by. It is absurd to accuse either DVs or polling station staff of being more or less partial than the other without evidence.

The role of the the DV is set out in electoral.commission.com "Electoral observation at United Kingdom elections and referendums". Having looked at this in detail the key aspects of investigation to determine whether the DV report is fit for purpose and verifiable its necessary to consider whther they abided by their role requirements as set out:
1) DVs "must aid in maintaining the secrecy of the ballot" 3.11.
2) DVs must "bring irregularities, fraud or significant problems to the attention of election officials on the spot".3.14
3) DVs "may ask and answer questions of voters" 3.16
4) DVs "must ensure that all their observations are accurate. Observations must be comprehensive, noting positive and negative factors, distinguishes between significant and insignificant factors and identifying patterns that could have an important impact on the integrity of electoral processes. Observer's judgement must be based on the highest standards for accuracy of information and impartiality of analysis, distinguishing subjective factors from objective evidence". 3.20

As I stated in an earlier post, I fail to understand why no individual DV brought any concerns about irregular "family voting" to the attention of any election officials on the spot, at the time as required in section 3.14. Also we have no detail or evidence to determine whether DVs observations of "family voting" sufficient distinguished between significant and insignificant factors and were based on the highest stands for accuracy etc as set out in 3.20. I fail to understand why the DV report did not set out the DV methodology and evidence collected in each polling stations to substantiate the report met the requirements of 3.20.

The voting process and role of the polling station staff is set out in the electoral commission.com "Handbook for polling station staff". The issues to determine for the polling station staff in light of DV concerns I would suggest are:
1) did all the polling station staff adhere to all the process requirements e.g. have the necessary signs and notices ( page 8 in handbook) - most importantly "How to vote at this election" displayed inside and outside the polling stationing and inside the polling booth "how to mark the ballot paper".
2) Did the polling staff have alternative language information available on request for voters whose first language was not English
3) What processes were followed to ensure all voters entered the polling booth as an INDIVIDUAL to cast their vote secretly.
4) What processes were followed to for voters that required assistance and did not enter the polling booth as an INDIVIDUAL to cast their vote secretly. How was this recorded?

As Farage made a complaint to GM Police I trust and hope the GMP investigate both the polling station staff and the DVs performance using the respective handbooks as guidance to be even handed and evidence based.

I saw the front pages of newspapers today on BBC News website. Today's Daily Mail front page in capitals: "FOREIGN -BORN VOTERS STOLE BY-ELECTION BLASTS FARAGE".

I'm disappointed on various levels- that Farage is copying Trump "the stolen election" rhetoric when it suits him, on a racist platform and without sufficient verifiable evidence. Farage hypocritically only refers to DV reports about "family voting" concerns when it suits him, ie not when he wins but only when he looses. E.g. he paid no such heed to the similar DV reports highlighting "family voting" concerns in the May 2025 by election when Reform beat Labour by JUST 6 votes, instead just accepted and celebrated the win. I'm not surprised but disappointed that Farage and newspapers like the DM make such claims BEFORE the police report and any necessary evidence is available to support such allegations. And lastly there has been so little attention paid to the claims made in the DV report, e.g. why did they not raise any such irregularities to election officials on the spot as required to do, on what basis and evidence did they make such claims etc.