Tory HQ are in disarray this weekend as it emerges that Bromley By-Election candidate Bob Neill is invalid to take a seat in Parliament and has made a false declaration on his nomination form.
Bob Neill’s ban from parliament stems from his membership of the North East London Strategic Health Authority, a position that explicitly prevents him standing for Parliament under the House of Commons Disqualification Act of 1975.
While Bob could bully his way though the ban by resigning after polling day if he is elected, this is a blatant disregard for the law that could permanently damage his credibility as a legislator. More seriously, in order to stand in the Bromley & Chislehurst by-election, Neill signed a declaration on his nomination form stating that he was not in breach of the House of Commons Disqualification Act of 1975 “at the time of nomination”.
A spokesman for Bob Neill refused to comment on the emerging crisis.
editor[at]recessmonkey.com
Loading ...
If nothing else this casts serious doubts on his competency for filling in paperwork, which surely reflects on his ability to handle complex things like… being an MP
Rob F said this on June 23rd, 2006 at 4:28 pm
Would you employ someone who you caught telling lies on their application form? I wouldn’t.
Eliza said this on June 23rd, 2006 at 5:30 pm
As long as he resigns from the Strategic Health Authority before he takes his seat (i.e. takes the oath or affirms and signs the Test Roll) this is not a problem.
Davros said this on June 23rd, 2006 at 5:38 pm
Davros I disagree. He lied on his nomination papers. He could have resigned from the Strategic Health Authority before standing, but chose to lie instead.
Eliza said this on June 23rd, 2006 at 5:54 pm
He is a barrister, if he does not know the law who does?
David said this on June 23rd, 2006 at 5:56 pm
The North East London Strategic Health Authority is being abolished next week! You can hardly be debarred from being a Member of Parliament for being a member of something that doesn’t exist. And indeed you cannot be a member of something that doesn’t exist. By the end of next week, the authority won’t exist, he won’t be a member of it, so what exactly is his offence? Challengers to Bob Neill seem pretty light on policy and strong on personal attacks, but this attack really seems to be clutching at straws.
Lesley said this on June 23rd, 2006 at 6:06 pm
Lesley; not to be rude, but you’re missing the point. As RM mentions in his piece, it would’ve been quite easy to mention in the paperwork the nature of the situation, thereby letting the RO decide on the legalities. Had he been up-front, I doubt this problem would exist; but by sweeping it under the carpet he has left himself open to all sorts of suspicion of his character. What else has he neglected to tell the electorate in Bromley?!
politicschimpette said this on June 23rd, 2006 at 10:42 pm
Of course Bob Neill might be the victim of incompetence at CCO on this. Be that as it may, my basic knowledge of electoral law sauggests that at the time of nomination he was the holder of “an office of profit under the crown” as it used to be referred to and stated that he was not. A legal difficulty I believe.
Erlend
Erlend said this on June 24th, 2006 at 12:35 pm
When I was a director of an NHS trust the DoH bumpf you got said you couldn’t stand for election to Parliament, not couldn’t take up office as an MP although I guess that is no guarantee that they got it right
Paul Leake said this on June 29th, 2006 at 12:20 am