UK Edition
Revealed: Election watchdog officials face calls to resign over Brexit 'bias'
Confidence in the elections watchdog is evaporating as it emerged that almost half of its board have made public statements criticising the pro-Brexit campaign or backing calls for the result to be overturned, despite strict impartiality rules.
An investigation by The Sunday Telegraph found that four of the Electoral Commission’s 10 commissioners, including the chairman, had made pronouncements on Brexit since the referendum – all of them backing Remain.
The body’s code of conduct states that commissioners must “act at all times” to “uphold its impartiality”.
It led to calls for the commissioners to resign, as MPs suggested their personal views could have been behind the Commission’s refusal to investigate alleged illicit collusion by pro-Remain campaign groups, while conducting several inquiries into the official Leave campaign.
In three cases, the comments about Brexit were made while the commissioners were in post.
In the fourth, speaking months after being nominated as the body’s next chairman, Sir John Holmes said in a speech that he “regret[ted] the result of the referendum”, and complained about “the panoply of Eurosceptic nonsense about the EU” heard during the campaign.
Brexiteers have previously accused the organisation of bias and claimed that the past roles of several commissioners suggest they are Europhiles.
Priti Patel, the pro-Leave former Cabinet minister, whose formal complaint about alleged rules breached by Remain campaign groups was rejected by the commission earlier this year, said: “There is clear evidence that the chairman and commissioners have publicly given views that undermine the standards and impartiality required in these roles. They should relinquish their positions and independent people should be brought in.”
Jacob Rees-Mogg, chairman of the European Research Group of pro-Brexit Conservative backbenchers, said: “This is very serious as the regulator of elections must be impartial.
"Anyone who has called for a second referendum or made political statements on Brexit ought to recuse him or herself from any decision with regard to the referendum.”
Gisela Stuart, the former Labour MP who chaired the official Vote Leave campaign, added: “Senior figures on the Electoral Commission need to act without bias – and to be seen to be unbiased – by the public. This is hugely important so that their rulings are respected as fair and even handed.”
In a speech less than a fortnight after the referendum, Sir John spoke of an alternative scenario in which Remain had prevailed. “The campaign for another referendum would not have taken long to start again, and all the panoply of Eurosceptic nonsense about the EU would have been rolled out again,” he said.
Sir John was interviewed for the Electoral Commission chairmanship three months earlier, with his name put forward by a panel chaired by John Bercow, the Commons Speaker.
In an online article also published after the referendum, David Howarth, a commissioner since 2014, asked how it could be allowed to “bind the young”, given that “Leave’s majority will have been reversed merely by the process of Leave voters dying and new Remain voters reaching the age of 18”.
Prof Howarth wrote that Leave voters “are already shifting to Remain” having been “shocked and surprised by the reactions of the markets” and by “Leave campaigners admitting their promises on immigration and health spending were mere ‘possibilities’”.
He went on to question whether it was “morally acceptable” to “press on with invoking Article 50”.
Six months later, following a speech in which Tony Blair declared that Brexit was not “inevitable” and could be overturned, Bridget Prentice, a former Labour MP who has served as a commissioner since 2014, tweeted: “Blair spot on re Brexit.” The code of conduct warns that use of social media should not “call into question the impartiality of the commission”.
Lord Horam, another commissioner, has made a number of remarks in the House of Lords since the referendum signalling his backing for Remain.
In July 2017, following a speech by another peer who said a second referendum was needed to allow people to make a decision once they had seen that “it will make sense not to leave the EU”, he said: “There is great logic in what the noble Lord has just said about the possibility of a second referendum. I agree that there is a logical case for that.” The code of conduct states: “Commissioners are expected to act at all times to further the commission’s aims and objectives, and uphold its impartiality … The highest standards of integrity, honesty, impartiality and objectivity … are integral to your role.”
A commission spokesman confirmed that it “has a number of investigations open in relation to campaigners at the EU referendum”, but added: “Commissioners do not have a role in investigatory procedures and decisions.” It told Ms Patel it did not have “reasonable grounds” to suspect wrongdoing.