Whilst the Student Protest thread http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopicpage/342514/80.html has it's merits it's sort of strayed a little, or god forbid been 'hijacked' (a bit like the protests themselves to some extent). However this is on a related but different matter.
As Phil Woolas was brought before an Election Court by the Liberal Democrats about lies in his General Election materials in Oldham East & Saddleworth, and has been dis-barred from being an MP this (for me) raises an interesting question.
The specially convened election court ruled that comments in campaign material suggesting Lib Dem candidate Elwyn Watkins had tried to "woo" the votes of Muslim extremists, clearly amounted to an attack on his personal character and conduct.
The court ruled he was guilty of breaching the Representation of the People Act 1983 and barred him from standing for elected office for three years, as well as fining him £5,000.
If some one lies to get elected they get dis-barred.
Therefore if Nick Clegg and the rest of the Liberal Democrat MP's who strongly and vocally opposed tuition fees in their General Election materials now vote for increases whilst now junior partners in a Coalition Government, could they be similarly be brought before an Election Court for lying ?
The Liberal Democrats campaigned on a pledge to phase out tuition fees over six years. All the Lib Dem MPs - including Business Secretary Vince Cable and the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg - signed pre-election promises to oppose any increase in fees.
And if so and be found guilty, could/should they similarly be dis-barred from office and local By-Elections called, as per the one likley to be moved soon for Oldham East & Saddleworth ?
An interesting question, especially given that it was the Lib Dems that challenged the Phil Woolas result via an Election Court.