Byline Times Audio Articles

The latest articles from Byline Times converted to audio for easy listening

  1. 19h ago

    'The 2026 Plan to Steal This Election, and All Those After' Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system 'Trump Has Already Rigged the 2028 Presidential Election': US Defence Insider US

    Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Election experts and legal analysts have raised concerns that the Trump administration and Republican leadership will challenge or interfere with the 2026 midterm outcomes. Trump has pushed the SAVE Act, which would make it much more difficult for Americans to register to vote, in the name of preventing non-citizens from illegally participating in elections. The administration has also attempted to access full, unredacted voter roll data in over 30 states, although so far their efforts have failed in every state that has taken them to court. Simultaneously, Trump has produced a laughably poor analysis to "prove" he won the 2020 election. One of the most common assumptions of how Republicans will try to deny election results and interfere with certification is that they will attempt to do so in close races, or in blue states where they can accuse Democratic leaders of letting "illegals" vote. The ultimate goal of this is to create a backstop against swearing in a Democratically held House by interfering with issuance of state election certificates or pressuring the U.S. Senate or House to block seating of duly elected members. However, there is also a hidden danger of election denial and interference even in deep blue, heavily gerrymandered districts in deep red states like Texas. If Republicans fail to hold onto the House or Senate in the 2026 midterms, the nearly inescapable conclusion is that they will reject the results. In fact, they may not even wait for the results to come in. The White House and Speaker Johnson, working with local state Republicans, will likely use the full force of the federal and state government to keep the Senate and House under GOP control. After looking at the various theories presented by election experts of how they will accomplish this, here is what may happen may happen, particularly in red states where the state and federal government can collude to deny certification under the jurisdiction of GOP-friendly courts. EXCLUSIVE Regardless of how people vote, the chances of a Democrat Government coming to power in 2029 is now virtually nil, argues Brynn Tannehill Brynn Tannehill First, Republicans will use the lack of the SAVE Act, any minor voting anomalies, and even outright conspiracy theories to claim that people voted illegally or machines miscounted votes. State and Federal authorities, particularly the Blanche at the DOJ and Patel at the FBI, will immediately launch investigations. Republican news outlets and social media will amplify this messaging, and Donald Trump will claim the entire election is fraudulent and potentially declare a national emergency. Election experts agree on the likely chain of events up to this point, but here is where the most likely scenario diverges from the scenarios that are most discussed. I see a lot of "election disaster porn" on social media that focuses on scenarios that wouldn't work, such as directly refusing to swear in and seat democrats, particularly those from hotly contested swing districts. These theories usually make the mistake of treating the House as a continuous body (it is not, and The Atlantic has made this mistake previously) and looking at swing districts as the most likely point of contention. Some revolve around the unlikely "rogue Clerk of the House" scenario. Others revolve around an impossible invocation of Article I Section 5 of the Constitution to deny Democrats the majority. The scenario that looks the most plausible and passes constitutional muster, according to my own analysis and that of respected election lawyers critical of other scenarios, is that deep red states in the South will use every tool available to delay certification of Democratically controlled districts until after January 3rd. If those seats are not certified by that date by the Clerk of the House, the majority of Representatives on the roll call will...

  2. 20h ago

    Evacuating Civilians from the 'Kill Zone' Under Threat from Drones in Eastern Ukraine Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system 'It Doesn't Matter if it's an Ambulance or a Military

    Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen The black van speeds along at 130 km/h on a road lined with sunflower fields. Behind the wheel of the ambulance, Andrey, a volunteer with the Relief organisation, keeps his eyes fixed on the road. Next to him, Sacha, a former soldier who has since switched to evacuating civilians, scans the sky, phone in hand. A message has just popped up on a military app: a Russian reconnaissance drone has been spotted within a radius of two to five kilometres. "So far, so good," he says, without taking his eyes off the screen. "The biggest danger comes from the drones we call 'lookouts,'" Sacha explains. "They can lie in ambush along the roadside. You can't spot them until they're right up close and charging at us." For these teams, the danger is very real. On February 4, a team of volunteers was targeted by a fibre-optic drone, followed by artillery fire, this time in the town of Berislav, in the Kherson region. Several civilians were seriously injured during that evacuation. A volunteer police officer filmed the scene with his GoPro camera. "To the Russians, an ambulance and a military vehicle are one and the same." Andrey sums up without taking his eyes off the road. "If they see a vehicle, they destroy it," he continues, gripping the steering wheel nervously as Sacha recalls a previous evacuation. "We heard the sound of the drones. We quickly got out of the car and hid in the bushes," he says. "We could hear a buzzing sound, but the drone didn't see us. It was frightening," he says. This is how the evacuation of the last civilians from the front-line zone has been proceeding for months. Inexpensive and easy to fly, FPV (first-person view) drones are now swarming this 30-kilometre-deep strip along the front line, which residents and soldiers have come to call the "kill zone". The ambulance brakes suddenly. Three villagers come out of their homes and get in, helped by the volunteers. "Thank you! Thank you so much, my angels," exclaims one of village residents. In the back of the armoured vehicle are three civilians who have just left Borova, about 5 km from the front line, located right in the heart of the combat zone. In just a few minutes, they were evacuated from the area, taking with them three meagrely filled shopping bags. During the journey to evacuate these civilians to safe areas, Halyna Mykolaïvna, born in 1965, opens up. She clutches her bag tightly. She describes what she left behind. Her house "is still standing for now." In her neighbourhood, other houses have already been destroyed, and neighbours have died. "It's very scary," she says. Looking haggard, she scans the passing landscape, as if to verify that the danger has truly disappeared. "Drones were constantly flying over the area. They're destroying everything," she explains. "They're striking military vehicles and, above all, civilians." "Drones were flying around like bees," she insists. She pauses before concluding in a whisper, "There was nothing left in the city. We could just hear the explosions all day long." Those most reluctant to leave are often the elderly, who have resigned themselves to their fate. That's where the volunteers step in, with the prior consent of the family members. Through a secure phone line, they receive dozens of calls every day from panicked families, at least one of whose loved ones remains trapped. What follows is a process of locating the person, making contact, and then extracting them under fire in just a few minutes. All the makeshift routes eventually lead to the same place: a transit centre in Kharkiv, a mandatory stop for evacuees from across the region. In the lobby, families wait on benches, bags piled at their feet. "We're currently receiving between 200 and 250 evacuees every day," explains Serhii, who has been one of the centre's coordinators for several years. He notes that this is a pace never before seen, and o...

  3. 21h ago

    Conservative and Reform Bid to Ban 'Foreign' Language Election Leaflets Defeated Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a

    Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Conservative and Reform attempts to ban election materials published in 'foreign' languages were roundly defeated in the House of Commons on Wednesday. The Government's flagship elections bill cleared the Commons on Wednesday evening, by 411 votes to 102, with the Conservatives and Reform opposing, having seen their efforts to criminalise campaigners for using languages not 'native' to the British Isles rejected. Conservative MP Paul Holmes' amendment to introduce a 'foreign' language ban for campaign materials during elections was defeated by 410 votes to 105. Reform had attempted to push an even stricter amendment. After Byline Times first reported on Reform's language-ban efforts in July – which would have made use of Cornish, Irish, Scots, Gaelic, Manx and other 'native' languages illegal in election materials – the party pledged to rewrite it. They did so, extending the permitted languages to all 'languages native to the British Isles', but the amendment was not called. Reform's amendment, unlike the Conservatives' fine-based approach, would have put campaigners in prison for using non-'native' UK languages. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. Conservative Katie Lam launched her case for the party's amendment by citing the recent Gorton and Denton by-election, won by the Greens' Hannah Spencer MP. Lam said the Green Party published leaflets in Urdu telling voters that if they wanted to "give the Muslims a strong voice, give your vote to the Greens". The shadow communities secretary said: "It should terrify all of us that election material in our country is being produced in a foreign language and designed to drum up support among a particular religious community. Not only does this contribute to a culture of group-based grievance politics, but it makes it impossible for the vast majority of the British public to scrutinise what candidates are saying." Labour's Peter Lamb hit out at Conservative Lam's remarks, where she linked "coercion, fraud and sectarianism in our democratic process" explicitly to migration. The Labour MP implied the comments were racially motivated, telling the House: "It was a good thing we had free hearing tests in Parliament just before recess, but I did not need one: the dog whistle across the Chamber was so loud that it was apparent to all of us." Hannah Spencer, the Green MP for Gorton and Denton, later challenged the factual basis of Lam's account of her by-election, hitting out at "misinformation about family voting in the Gorton and Denton by-election, despite the fact that it was run within the law and saw me elected with an overwhelming majority, and that Greater Manchester police found no evidence of criminality." Deputy Speaker Ghani declined to rule on the content, and Lam did not withdraw her comments. Lib Dem Lisa Smart also replied to Lam's remarks, saying: "I wonder whether the shadow Secretary of State sees a certain irony in attempting to legislate for linguistic purity in a language that, for over a millennium, has borrowed vocabulary ad hoc from other languages, such as Italian, Latin and French, and in a Bill that talks about elections, referendums, vetoes and manifestos." Lam replied: "The fact that English takes words from other languages does not mean that an English voter, or indeed any British voter, would be able to read election material in Latin." SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES Labour's Luke Akehurst also challenged the Conservatives on their own practices, asking: "Could the hon. Lady confirm to the House whether the Conservative party has ever published election leaflet...

  4. 1d ago

    Police Contradict Reform Council Over Claim Town Centres are 'Unsafe' Due to Asylum Seekers Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE D

    Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Essex Police have appeared to contradict Reform-run Essex Council's suggestions that parts of the county are unsafe due to asylum seekers being hosted at the former RAF Wethersfield base. On Friday, Essex County Council's Cabinet member for Education, SEND and Skills – and Basildon mayor – Cllr Sam Journet announced on X that Reform UK Essex has launched "Operation Vanguard". He claimed it would "[put] security personnel on the streets of Colchester, Chelmsford and Braintree to help protect residents and provide a visible presence." "We were elected to put residents first, and that is exactly what we intend to do." In September last year, Cllr Journet was arrested on suspicion of stalking, harassment and assault in Basildon Council offices. He was not charged and subsequently faced no further action. The police admitted error in not seizing his devices at the time. Wethersfield Airfield Asylum Accommodation (AAA) currently accommodates "up to" 800 people who are seeking asylum, according to the council. The Reform-run authority claims the Government is "seeking an increase in the number of people who can be accommodated at the site to 1,245, potentially increasing numbers by up to sixty additional people per week." Cllr Journet's apparently AI-generated graphic promoting 'Operation Vanguard' shows a cobbled high street at dusk, lined with period buildings, shopfronts, cafés and a Union Jack flag. Reform UK's branding is prominent, followed by large headline text saying "Security on Our Streets", and beneath that "Protecting Residents in Colchester, Chelmsford, Braintree". Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. Three white people in matching dark navy uniforms have "Communty Security" printed on their chests in the image. Over the weekend, Cllr Journet shared multiple images of brown and black people with their faces pixelated, who were apparently asylum seekers, to promote the scheme. In one he writes: "Every day, illegal migrants are being bussed into town centres across Essex. Residents are entitled to ask what that means for their community. Reform UK's Operation Vanguard is about prevention, visible security and protecting women and girls." But asked about the scheme, an Essex Police spokesperson appeared to slap down the suggestions that the areas being targeted by the new council 'Operation' are unsafe. "Braintree, Colchester, and Chelmsford town and city centres are safe places, and all three areas see less crime than three years ago. "Our Neighbourhood Policing Teams regularly patrol through the town centres each day, including at key times, for reassurance and to deter people from committing crime or anti-social behaviour," Essex Police told Byline Times. The police spokesperson added: "Where incidents do take place, we respond and act robustly. We continue to work with our partners, including local authorities, to ensure the public feel safe." SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES The spokesperson did not endorse the council scheme – and in fact appeared to distance the force from the Reform project. The spokesperson said: "The most effective way to achieve this is by addressing concerns or points of tension within our communities and to resolve them through this joined-up approach. "We have a dedicated unit based at RAF Wethersfield who is there to support the local surrounding community and deal with issues linked to the site." A decision notice published by Essex Council also appears to contradict the council's official press release and the claims of Cllr Journet. The decision was signed by leader Cllr Harris on 28 August ...

  5. 2d ago

    Andy Burnham Faces Backlash Over Apparent Retreat From Donations Cap Pledge Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a stor

    Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Public figures and civil society groups have urged Andy Burnham not to abandon a campaign pledge to stamp out big money "corrupting our politics." Labour backbencher Stella Creasy has tabled a revised amendment to the Representation of the People Bill, being debated in Parliament this Wednesday, which would introduce an immediate £500,000 cap on donations to UK parties, falling to £100,000 the following year. It would also require the Government to establish a permanent cap after taking advice from the Electoral Commission. It has been signed by 31 MPs as of Tuesday morning, putting it in the top-twenty of the most backed amendments. There are hundreds of amendments, including around 100 from the Government. The Government amendments are silent on a domestic donations cap. The list is likely to be heavily whittled down by the speaker for Wednesday's Report Stage and third reading of the landmark elections bill, which had already been delayed at the end of Keir Starmer's premiership. Another amendment from Stella Creasy calls for a flat £100,000 donation cap immediately, which has 46 signatures, though it appears less likely to be pushed now that there is a "compromise" amendment from the Labour MP which could be more amenable to Government whips. Broadcaster Carol Vorderman has joined 20 leading civil society figures from a wide range of sectors in calling on Prime Minister Andy Burnham to cap political donations – as he vowed to do in the days before he became Prime Minister. Byline Times first reported in June, before Burnham became PM, that he supported capping political donations in the UK. In correspondence with a Byline Times reader who campaigns for political finance reform, the then-Greater Manchester mayor said he wanted to see a cap on donations to stem the tide of big money in politics. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. He added that he would like to see a UK political donation cap reduced over time, and believes Westminster needs "wholesale culture change." The proposal for a political funding overhaul came in correspondence with Shaun Bowler, founder of grassroots democracy campaign WakeUpGB. Andy Burnham, then running for the Makerfield parliamentary by-election, told Bowler: "Yes, I do think there should be a cap on political donations. This would guard against the perception of any one party being unduly influenced or swayed by one person or organisation." "I am in complete agreement that there needs to be wholesale culture change in Westminster." "I would start with a higher cap but would definitely want to see that reduced over time… I do support the principle of caps," he added. However, he has since appeared to distance himself from backing an immediate cap on political donations. The Government is introducing a £100,000 annual cap for donations from overseas voters, but has so far rejected extending that to voters living in the UK. Shaun Bowler, founder of WakeUpGB which was in correspondence with Andy Burnham, told this outlet: "Andy Burnham was clear with us. He said yes to a cap. He gave us a figure, around £500,000. He said Westminster needed wholesale culture change. He said all of that while he still needed support to win a seat. "He's Prime Minister now, and the Bill in front of Parliament doesn't contain the reform he told us he backed. There is an obvious appearance of hypocrisy when a politician says the system needs to change, then gets the power to change it and doesn't. If he's changed his mind, he should say so. If he hasn't, we want to know what he intends to do about it." This week'...

  6. 2d ago

    The Dark Money Questions Surrounding Kemi Badenoch's Net Zero Attacks Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Don't miss a story Poll

    Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen A call came in from GB News late on Tuesday 18 August, asking whether I would come on their midnight show to discuss an embargoed speech on climate action by the Conservatives, to be given the following day by the Shadow Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho. As I embarked on some last-minute research, I did not realise I was about to be plunged into another row over dark money think tanks, which our Media Sovereignty Act Campaign seeks to ban. The speech was an announcement by Coutinho on how the Conservative Party proposed to tear up its own Government's legislation for a carbon-free target date for 2050. The press release had a covering statement by the Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch, which also committed the party to maximising new North Sea oil and gas, despite the field being already 93% depleted. This follows Badenoch's extraordinary ruling that no Conservative Party member who supports the party's previous commitment to a carbon-free 2050 could stand for selection as a party candidate. Yet polling shows a majority of members support climate action. The International Energy Agency has stated that new oil and gas would mean the world cannot remain under the Paris Climate Agreement's mandated maximum global temperature rise of 1.5C. Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. Coutinho's speech was based on the new report by the Conservative-aligned think tank Onward called "Firm Foundations" on the costs of removing carbon pollution from the electricity grid. I quickly searched online for Onward's donors. Onward is better than most right-wing think tanks, as it reports donors to the end of the previous year. But it is dark on donors since 1 January. Last year's major donor list shocked me more than I expected. It included the privatised National Grid plc, now owned by Abu Dhabi and US, Norwegian and other investors. National Grid plc is one of the key stakeholders in the recommendations of the Onward report on cutting electricity costs. Another major donor that shocked me was Equinor, co-owners of the controversial Rosebank oil field, that Kemi Badenoch's speech on the Onward report gave full backing to. Other fossil fuelled donors included billionaire oil giants Shell and BP. SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES When I reported the various perceived conflicts of interest on the show, the GB News presenter dismissed the conflict of interest point, stating that what mattered was not who funded the report but what it contained. I only had time to scan the report summary before the television interview. But once I had time to read the full report, one of its main theses was that electricity prices could be cut by ending most government policies to cut fossil fuel consumption in the UK. It calls for ending the UK's participation in the Emissions Trading Scheme, which puts a price on carbon pollution, the ending of incentives to electrify heating and cars, tearing up the Climate Change Act – the law which commits the UK to cutting its emissions – and the retention of 85% of current fossil gas power production up to 2050. It admits that this would emit up to 500 million more tonnes of carbon pollution. But the "economic" arguments also alarmed me. The assertion that ending decarbonisation investment would result in cheaper electricity was founded on two outrageous assumptions: that fossil gas prices would be significantly lower than at present for the next three decades, and that nuclear power costs could be reduced radically. Neither of which has happened in the real world for decades. We put these points to Onward. In response to the alleged...

  7. 6d ago

    UK Sent Top Security Chief to Trump's Left-Wing Crackdown Summit Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system Trump's Crackdown on Dissent Won't Stop With Antifa Don't miss a story 'Ene

    Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen The UK quietly sent one of its most senior security officials to a Trump administration summit which proposed to turn global counter-terrorism infrastructure against the political left, Byline Times can reveal. Responding to a Freedom of Information request, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) confirmed to this newspaper that Director General of Defence and Security Jonathan Allen attended US Secretary of State Marco Rubio's 'Ministerial on the Resurgence of Political Terrorism' in person in Washington, D.C. on the 16th of July following an invitation from the US State Department. This was no typical international security summit. Framing the issue in explicitly political terms, Rubio – standing alongside White House policy advisor Stephen Miller, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent – proposed a new global counter-terrorism doctrine targeting expansively defined left-wing "political terrorism," urging allied governments to coordinate intelligence, law enforcement and financial powers against the emergent left-wing threat. The meeting was accompanied by the announcement of a new visa policy, in which the State Department will target "far-left terrorist and other aligned groups", for violent actions as well as "economic sabotage including against public and private property" – which could encompass certain recognised forms of protest. The 'Ministerial' has been heavily criticised as an attempt to internationalise a law enforcement strategy already being pursued domestically, where the Trump administration has cast an extraordinarily broad range of political opponents and protest movements as potential security threats – and completely omitted any mention of rising far-right violence. Britain sent a top security official with decades of experience spanning counter-terrorism, intelligence and national security. Allen's attendance is, of course, not proof of UK compliance with Rubio's expansive new doctrine – but it is emerging evidence of serious high-level engagement with it. Allen previously served as the Foreign Office's Director of National Security and, more recently, Director General for Defence and Intelligence. Earlier in his career, he worked in the Home Office's Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism, where he established and led the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU), a controversial counter-extremism strategic communications operation associated with the Prevent programme. The sentences handed down to protestors at an immigration detention centre were all more severe than even the longest prison sentence given to any of the January 6 insurrectionists Caroline Orr Bueno Thomas Renard, Director of the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism (ICCT), told Byline Times that Allen's attendance can only be understood in the context of considerable European uncertainty and "unease" over the Trump administration's new "politicised" direction. US State Department officials had spent months touring Europe seeking support for the initiative, he said, leaving allied governments with an awkward diplomatic calculation. European counter-terrorism services recognise that violent far-left extremism warrants some attention, but Renard said that "no one that I'm aware of shares the perception of the United States that left-wing extremism has become the main threat" – certainly not in Europe. Beyond concerns about stifling lawful opposition, "politicising counter-terrorism is the main risk of this whole circus," Renard said. "If this politicisation reaches further into the actual daily work of European intelligence services – they will end up completely neglecting the far-right violent extremist threat and some other threats on the horizon." Neither the Foreign Office, Cabinet Office, nor Allen himself directly addressed this newspaper's queries about the impact the meeting had on Britain...

  8. 6d ago

    Reform's £645,000 'Ghost' Pollster Read our Monthly Magazine And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system Don't miss a story No Trace in the Industry ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE Raft of Senio

    Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Reform and its predecessor party spent over £645,000 on polling and canvassing work from an anonymous sole trader going by the name 'COR Research'. COR Research, which worked for the Brexit Party in 2019 and for Reform UK in 2024, has no Companies House entry, no social media presence, and ten key invoices are missing on the Electoral Commission website – something Reform UK has been criticised for by the elections watchdog. The Commission's own spending database records the supplier as an individual. The sole trader's only public presence is a single-page website carrying a logo, the line "The best vision is insight", and a contact form. It gives no address, no named individual, and no description of what the business does. The domain was registered on 28 January 2019, three months before the first invoice. The payments were between May 2019 and July 2024. Most of the spending – £529,160 of the £645,560 – was paid by the Brexit Party across the 2019 European and general elections, while £116,400 was paid in 2024, after the same party was renamed Reform UK. Invoices filed with the Electoral Commission in 2024 list only a serviced office address near the Bank of England. Earlier invoices redact the address altogether. The earliest invoices charge no VAT and state in print that none is payable. Analysis by this outlet of the Commission's published spending records places the VAT registration window for the mysterious supplier roughly between 15 July and 25 August 2019. Every COR Research invoice in that period is blank on the Commission's website. The record for a £15,360 payment of 25 August 2019 — the invoice that would settle the question — is an empty document. SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES Two polling industry figures this outlet spoke to had no information about the firm. COR Research is not registered with the British Polling Council, the Market Research Society or ESOMAR. The last invoice in July 2024 – just before the General Election – was for "Final Four Seat Target Polling." Polling on that scale would normally require a substantial fieldwork team, according to polling experts this outlet spoke to. Lord (Mark) Pack, a Lib Dem peer who runs The Week in Polls Substack, told this outlet: "Reform are doing themselves no favours with the lack of transparency over the campaign spending. Transparency rules are a fundamental part of how we protect our democracy from malign influences such as foreign states and billionaires such as Elon Musk. They could, and should, do better." On the Commission's published figures, COR Research's total billing crossed £85,000 – the threshold at which VAT registration becomes compulsory – in late August 2019, at almost exactly the point the recorded amounts begin to be consistent with VAT being charged. On that analysis, registration appears to have been made when it fell due rather than late. However, despite that £36,000 invoice charging £6,000 of VAT, it states at the bottom: "By virtue of paragraph 15 of Schedule 1 and paragraph 9 of Schedule 3 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994, no VAT is payable. Business name registration is voluntary in the United Kingdom. No business name has been registered." Accountants this outlet spoke to say it makes little sense, though it may be boilerplate text which was never removed after registration. Dr Sam Power, a leading expert in political financing, electoral regulation and corruption at the University of Bristol, told Byline Times the situation "does seem odd." Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account. SUBSCRIBE TODAY We're not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe. "Political parties using businesses with rather opaque ...

Ratings & Reviews

5
out of 5
4 Ratings

About

The latest articles from Byline Times converted to audio for easy listening

More From Byline Audio

You Might Also Like