Before British politics got swept up in a whirlwind of Brexit, leadership challenges and a change of cabinet, one of the biggest stories was the allegations surrounding Conservative general election spending in 2015.

The hashtag #ToryElectionFraud was trending on Twitter, and people were speculating that the revelations could lead to prosecutions, to MPs losing their seats, and that it could even bring down David Cameron’s government.

What are the allegations?

There are two main sets of allegations.

Channel 4 News claims to have uncovered thousands of pounds worth of spending on hotel rooms for Conservative activists during the Rochester and Strood, Clacton and Newark byelections that weren’t declared as part of the local campaign activity. This is also alleged to have been part of their campaign to prevent Nigel Farage winning South Thanet in the 2015 general election.



The Daily Mirror subsequently cast doubt on the way the Tories allocated expenditure for their “Battlebus 2015” campaign. The bus appears to have cost more than £2,000 a day to run, but the expense was deemed to be a national campaigning cost, so wasn’t allocated to the constituencies where the bus and the volunteers staffing it were campaigning.

Did it make a difference to the general election result?

It is difficult to prove that the battlebus campaign was the factor that swung the last election in the Conservatives’ favour, although it was specifically targeting marginal and swing seats, and clearly the Tories saw it as a key campaigning tool.

Graham Evans MP, for example, won Weaver Vale for the Conservatives from Labour with a majority of just 806. Channel 4 allege that one day of the battlebus visiting his constituency had a value of £2,154.03, which would have pushed him £1,018 over his spending limit for the campaign.

What is the Electoral Commission doing about it?

The body responsible for the way elections are conducted took the Conservative party to court to obtain documentation the party had failed to provide, so it could carry out an investigation. However, earlier this month the commission withdrew their action against the party, stating that:

“The Electoral Commission has today (15 July) announced that as part of its investigation into the Conservative and Unionist party campaign spending returns it launched on 18 February 2016, it has withdrawn its application to the high court for an information and document disclosure order. This means that there will be no hearing regarding the order. The commission has made this decision because since issuing its application to the high court on 12 May, it has received sufficient material from the party to proceed with its investigation.”

The commission has said it will make no further comment about an ongoing investigation.

What is the Conservative party saying?

In June the Tory MP Charles Walker wrote to the commission to ask it to widen its investigation to include national spending by Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National party.

He identified the use of Labour’s “pink bus” targeting female voters, Nicola Sturgeon using a helicopter as transport, and the Liberal Democrats using an election bus as examples where expenditure was not allocated to the constituency where campaigning took place.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Charles Walker and his letter to the Electoral Commission. Composite: Martin Godwin/The Guardan

Many commentators have suggested that one reason opposition parties have not spoken out about Tory election spending is because they feel vulnerable to similar accusations.

Where does that leave us?

Nearly 20 police forces are investigating the allegations over Conservative spending, with some successfully applying to the courts for extra time to look into the issue.

The Electoral Commission has not yet stated in public if it will widen its inquiries as the Conservatives have asked, but the Labour MP Cat Smith is being investigated over her election expenses return.

What could the punishments be if MPs are found guilty?

In May, the Financial Times quoted Conservative sources saying they were concerned MPs could go to jail.

David Allen Green, who has written extensively on the subject, said that at a national level, if the Conservatives were found to have “knowingly or recklessly” made a false accounting declaration, the party treasurer could face a year in jail.

However, recent history suggests that is unlikely. The Electoral Commission found that the Better Together campaign had under-declared its Scottish independence referendum expenses by £57,000, and issued a fine of £2,000. The sum in question for Conservative hotel rooms is around £40,000.

At a constituency level, in order for an MP or their agent to face sanction, a court would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there was “wrongful and dishonest intention” on their part, rather than merely a misallocation or misunderstanding between the local and national party organisation. It will be up to police forces to pass their findings to the Crown Prosecution Service to decide whether to charge any MP.

There is speculation that if somehow it was shown that the Tories should not have had a majority after the general election then the laws passed by Cameron’s government, and even the outcome of the European Union referendum could be rendered null and void. David Allen Green, however, dismissed this: “There is no possibility whatsoever of legislation being rendered legally invalid by reason of any disqualifications of members of parliament. The laws passed by parliament will still stand.”

What happens next?

We wait. Police forces across the country who have applied for extensions have nearly a year in which to complete their investigations.