Electoral Law: Remain's Vote, Legal Or Not?

The 2016 EU referendum was mired in allegations of unlawful campaigning, with several institutions investigating the claims. The Electoral Commission found that two Remain campaigns, Wake Up And Vote (WUAV) and DDB UK Limited, worked together, breaking electoral law. They were fined for failing to declare joint spending. However, the Commission dismissed claims that the official Remain campaign broke electoral law, stating there was insufficient evidence to justify a full investigation. The official Leave campaign, Vote Leave, was also investigated and fined for breaking electoral law, with the High Court ruling that the Commission misinterpreted referendum spending laws, allowing Vote Leave to break them. The Remain and Leave campaigns were both criticised and fined by watchdogs, with the scale and variety of issues in the 2016 referendum campaign surpassing that of a typical British general election.

The Electoral Commission found that two Remain campaigns worked together, breaking electoral law

The Electoral Commission found that two Remain campaigns, Wake Up And Vote (WUAV) and DDB UK Limited, worked together, breaking electoral law. The two campaigns were set up less than a month before the referendum campaign and shared big donors, funneling more than £1 million into the Remain cause. They created unbranded videos that were shared by the official Britain Stronger in Europe campaign. DDB UK Limited was fined £1,800 for failing to declare joint spending with Wake Up And Vote. This came after a £1,000 fine handed to DDB in March 2018 for other inaccuracies in its spending return.

The Electoral Commission's Director of Regulation, Louise Edwards, stated that both campaigns failed to accurately declare joint spending in their referendum spending returns, which meant that voters were unable to know how much each campaigner spent in total. This incident occurred amidst other allegations of unlawful campaigning in the 2016 EU referendum by several institutions, including the Electoral Commission, the Information Commissioner's Office, the National Crime Agency, the Metropolitan Police, and the Crown Prosecution Service.

The Electoral Commission's investigation into the spending of Britain Stronger in Europe and Vote Leave revealed that they had not submitted all the necessary invoices, receipts, or details to back up their accounts. As a result, the Commission levied fines on political parties and other campaign entities for breaching campaign finance rules during the referendum campaign. The official Leave campaign was fined and referred to the police for breaking electoral law.

The High Court also ruled that the Electoral Commission misinterpreted EU referendum spending laws, allowing Vote Leave to break them. The Commission had initially cleared Vote Leave of breaking spending limits but later found that they had broken electoral law by spending over their limit in conjunction with Darren Grimes' Brexit campaign, BeLeave. The matter was referred to the police, and the High Court confirmed the illegality of the overspending.

The Remain campaign, which included figures such as David Cameron and George Osborne, was also fined £1,000 in December 2018 for failing to provide a complete and accurate spending return.

The Remain campaign was fined £1,000 for failing to provide a complete and accurate spending return

The Remain campaign was fined for failing to provide a complete and accurate spending return. The £1,000 fine was issued to DDB UK, a pro-Remain group, for failing to properly declare "common plan" spending with another pro-Remain group, Wake Up And Vote (WUAV). The groups were found to have incorrectly declared their joint spending on the campaign, with WUAV spending £51,812.90 on a video campaign featuring Keira Knightley, which should have been declared as joint spending. This fine was issued in addition to a previous £1,000 fine handed to DDB in March 2018 for other inaccuracies in its spending return.

The Remain campaign was also accused of breaking electoral law by former Conservative minister Priti Patel, who alleged that Britain Stronger in Europe had engaged in "joint working" with other Remain campaign groups. However, the Electoral Commission dismissed these claims, stating that they did not find sufficient evidence to justify a full investigation. They concluded that the meetings described by Patel were advisory and did not involve or result in decisions on referendum spending.

The Remain campaign's use of personal data was also investigated by the Information Commissioner's Office, which looked into the acquisition and deployment of data sold to the campaign by the Liberal Democrats. However, it is unclear what the outcome of this investigation was.

The Electoral Commission dismissed claims that the Remain campaign broke electoral law

The Electoral Commission has dismissed claims that the official Remain campaign broke electoral law. It rejected allegations of "joint working" with other Remain campaign groups, stating that there was insufficient evidence to justify a full investigation. The Commission's spokesperson said that it had not been provided with evidence to support the claims and that the evidence submitted by former Conservative minister Priti Patel "did not meet the threshold for an investigation to be opened".

The allegations against the Remain campaign centred around the idea of "joint working" or "common plan" spending. Under electoral law, if a campaigning organisation coordinates closely with another campaign group, their spending must be counted towards their own spending limit. However, the Electoral Commission found no evidence to support these allegations.

While the Remain campaign was cleared of any wrongdoing, the official Leave campaign was fined and referred to the police for multiple breaches of electoral law. The Electoral Commission found that Vote Leave had broken electoral law by spending over its limit, failing to declare £675,000 incurred under a common plan with Darren Grimes' Brexit campaign, BeLeave.

The Electoral Commission's handling of the situation has been criticised, with some arguing that it misinterpreted referendum spending laws, allowing Vote Leave to break them. The High Court agreed with this assessment, ruling that the Commission had ""misinterpreted the definition of 'referendum expenses'". Despite this, the High Court also concluded that Vote Leave's donation to Mr Grimes, which went to the Canadian digital agency AggregateIQ, should have counted as part of Vote Leave's campaign expenses.

The Remain campaign, on the other hand, faced scrutiny for its data handling practices. The Information Commissioner's Office investigated the official Remain campaign's use of personal data, including data sold to it by the Liberal Democrats. While the investigation was ongoing as of 2019, it is important to note that no findings of wrongdoing by the Remain campaign have been established in this regard.

The Remain campaign shared data, suppliers, campaign materials, coordinated spending, funnelled money and potentially spent double the legal limit

In 2018, Priti Patel accused the official Remain campaign, Britain Stronger in Europe, of "joint working" with other Remain campaign groups. She asked the Electoral Commission to launch an investigation into the Remain campaign's spending during the referendum.

Priti Patel's allegations included that Remainers shared data, suppliers, and campaign materials, coordinated spending, funnelled money to new campaigns set up in the month before the vote, and potentially spent double the legal limit.

The Electoral Commission initially refused to investigate. However, in September 2019, it found that two Remain campaigns, Wake Up And Vote (WUAV) and DDB UK Limited, had worked together, breaking electoral law. They were fined for failing to declare joint spending.

The Commission's Director of Regulation, Louise Edwards, stated that WUAV and DDB UK Limited had failed to accurately declare joint spending in their referendum spending returns. This meant that voters could not know the total amount spent by each campaigner.

It is worth noting that allegations of unlawful campaigning in the 2016 EU referendum have been made against both Leave and Remain campaigns. While some allegations were dismissed, wrongdoing was established in some cases, leading to penalties and fines.

The official Remain campaign's use of personal data, including data sold to it by the Liberal Democrats, was investigated

The ICO's initial report on political campaigns, published in 2018, was the largest investigation of its type by a data protection authority at the time. It uncovered the "invisible processing of voters' personal data and the micro-targeting of political adverts" during the EU referendum. The report included investigations into several organisations, such as Cambridge Analytica, Vote Leave, and Leave.EU, with some being fined or referred to the police for breaches of data privacy and electoral law.

The ICO's investigation into the Liberal Democrats and the Remain campaign continued, with the ICO stating it would examine the potential involvement of canvassing data in the deal. The ICO's decision to withhold details of its ongoing investigation until after the 2019 general election drew criticism from privacy advocates, who called for transparency from all political parties regarding their use of personal data.

In 2019, the Electoral Commission also addressed allegations that the Remain campaign broke electoral law. It dismissed claims of "joint working" and found insufficient evidence to justify a full investigation, concluding that the Remain campaign did not exceed its spending limit.

Frequently asked questions