This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39291495

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Q&A: Conservative election expenses row The Conservative election expenses cases explained
(2 months later)
The Conservatives have been fined £70,000 for breaking election expenses rules. The Crown Prosecution Service has announced that no Conservative politicians or officials are to be prosecuted for allegedly breaking election expenses rules in 2015.
Why have the Conservatives been fined? What has happened?
The party failed to accurately report how much it spent on its 2015 general election campaign and on three by-elections. Fourteen files on alleged expenses violations were handed to the CPS by local police forces to decide if criminal prosecutions could be mounted.
What's wrong with that? The CPS could find no evidence that spending rules had been deliberately broken by Tory agents or candidates when filling in their returns.
"Although there is evidence to suggest the returns may have been inaccurate, there is insufficient evidence to prove to the criminal standard that any candidate or agent was dishonest," said Nick Vamos, head of special crime at the CPS, in a statement.
Is that the end of the matter?
A fifteenth file, on the contest in South Thanet, where the Tories saw off a challenge from then UKIP leader Nigel Farage, was only recently handed to the CPS by Kent Police. The CPS said it "remains under consideration".
Nick Vamos said: "No inference as to whether any criminal charge may or may not be authorised in relation to this file should be drawn from this fact and we will announce our decision as soon as possible once we have considered the evidence in this matter."
What impact will this have on the general election?
It will be a big relief to the Conservative Party. If the CPS had decided to press ahead with prosecutions it would have thrown the party's campaign into chaos. All of the contests under investigation were in marginal seats. The party would have faced a last-minute scramble to get new candidates in place before the deadline.
What have the Conservatives said?
Party chairman Patrick McLoughlin said: "These were politically motivated and unfounded complaints that have wasted police time. We are glad that this matter is finally resolved.
"A number of false and malicious claims continue to be spread on the internet. People should be aware that making false claims about a candidate's personal character and conduct is an electoral offence, as well as being defamatory.
"Notwithstanding these false claims, Conservatives want to strengthen election rules to safeguard electoral integrity - in light of the real and proven cases of electoral fraud exposed in Tower Hamlets in 2015."
The Conservative candidate for Lincoln, Karl McCartney, who was interviewed as part of the investigation, said heads should roll at the Electoral Commission watchdog.
"This whole saga amounts to no more than a politically-motivated witch-hunt," he added.
What about Labour?
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said he was "surprised" by the CPS decision and wanted to "look at the details" of it.
He said he accepted that the CPS was an independent body and "they have to make the judgement" but it was crucial election law was enforced to ensure that "money can't buy power".
What was the row about?
The Conservative Party failed to accurately report how much it spent on its 2015 general election campaign and on three by-elections. In March they were fined a record £70,000 by the Electoral Commission, which criticised the party for resisting its investigation in a report,
The investigation was prompted by a Channel 4 News investigation,
The Electoral Commission believed criminal offences may have taken place under the Representation of the People Act and asked the CPS to look into it.
What were the Conservatives accused of doing?
The party was essentially accused of using its national party muscle to get local candidates elected - something that's not allowed under the rules.The party was essentially accused of using its national party muscle to get local candidates elected - something that's not allowed under the rules.
Parties have to stick to strict spending limits to try to ensure a level playing field. By under-reporting how much had been spent, the Electoral Commission said there was a "realistic prospect" that Conservative candidates gained a financial advantage over their rivals. Parties have to stick to strict spending limits to try to ensure a level playing field.
Did the party deliberately cheat? Why did the CPS decide not to prosecute?
The commission is not taking a view on this. It has reported the Conservative treasurer until April 2016, Simon Day, to the Metropolitan Police, which will look at whether he "knowingly or recklessly made a false declaration". The Conservatives say the misreported spending figures were an "administrative error" and not evidence of a conspiracy. The CPS looked at whether candidates and election agents working in constituencies that were visited by the Conservative Party's party's "battle bus" had committed an offence by not declaring related expenditure on their local returns.
Don't all the parties do this? It found local Tory agents had been told that costs relating to the "battle bus" were part of the party's national campaign. As a result, the CPS concluded, "it would not be possible to prove any agent acted knowingly or dishonestly".
How did the Conservatives explain the errors?
The Conservatives say the misreported spending figures were an "administrative error" and not evidence of a conspiracy.
Don't all the parties bend the rules?
The Liberal Democrats were fined £20,000 in December for undeclared general election spending. Three months earlier, Labour was fined the same amount for not fully declaring its election spending, including more than £7,000 on the so-called Ed Stone, on which then leader Ed Miliband carved six election pledges.The Liberal Democrats were fined £20,000 in December for undeclared general election spending. Three months earlier, Labour was fined the same amount for not fully declaring its election spending, including more than £7,000 on the so-called Ed Stone, on which then leader Ed Miliband carved six election pledges.
That's one reason why the main opposition parties are not making more noise about the Conservative fine - they are all guilty, to some extent, of breaking the rules.
What can be done to stop it?What can be done to stop it?
The Electoral Commission says it does not have sufficient powers to prevent overspending. It has warned that "there is a risk that some political parties might come to view the payment of these fines as a cost of doing business". The Electoral Commission says it does not have sufficient powers to prevent overspending. It has warned that "there is a risk that some political parties might come to view the payment of these fines as a cost of doing business". Also, the Commission can only investigate national party spending and does not have the power to bring criminal prosecutions. The Conservatives say they "want to strengthen election rules to safeguard electoral integrity".
Why was the Conservatives' fine so high?
It is made up of three separate fines.
What about criminal prosecutions?
The Electoral Commission can only investigate national party spending and does not have the power to bring criminal prosecutions. Separately, 12 police forces have asked the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to consider charges over election expenses.
BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg says senior Conservative sources think it's unlikely the reporting mistakes will reach the hurdle for criminal prosecution.
The CPS has to believe there is a good chance of a successful conviction, and senior Tories don't believe in most of the cases that's likely.
Will these elections have to be rerun?
It's technically possible but unlikely. If an MP is jailed, they are disqualified from sitting in the Commons and a by-election has to be held. But it is their agent, who normally handles the paperwork, who would be more likely to find themselves in the dock over false reporting of election expenses, which carries a maximum sentence of 12 months.
An election court could declare the election void but the judge would have to decide whether the sums involved were enough to materially affect the result.
What did the Conservatives spend the money on?
The Electoral Commission's report, which was prompted by a Channel 4 News investigation, focuses on three by-elections - Clacton, Newark and Rochester and Strood, all seats where the Conservatives were facing a strong challenge from UKIP.
It also looked at the Tories' successful campaign to prevent then UKIP leader Nigel Farage winning the South Thanet seat at the general election. It focused on a team of national officials who arrived in the area from London and checked into a Premier Inn hotel in Margate.
The Conservatives argued that they had, unusually, based their national anti-UKIP campaign in the Kent constituency but the watchdog found that a proportion of the party's national spending actually went on helping local candidate Craig Mackinlay and should have been declared in his election return - Nigel Farage is also facing calls for his party's spending in South Thanet to be investigated.
Separately, the commission investigated spending on the Conservatives' general election battle bus, which ferried young activists around the country.
The commission found no evidence to suggest the party had funded the Battlebus2015 campaign to promote the success of individual candidates.
But it said there was a "clear and inherent risk" that activists on the coaches "might engage in candidate campaigning" and that "it is apparent that candidate campaigning did take place" during the tour.