Vote Leave chairman: We complied with the rules as we saw them Former city MP Stuart defends campaign as she claims Chequers deal is at limit of acceptability
THE chairman of the Vote Leave campaign has insisted: “We always complied with the rules as we saw them”.
Gisela Stuart, former Labour MP for Birmingham Edgbaston, defended the conduct of the campaign after Vote Leave was fined £61,000 for breaking election rules, and referred to the police.
The Electoral Commission, the official watchdog, imposed the fine and asked the Metropolitan Police to investigate, because it believes Vote Leave broke its spending limit during the 2016 Brexit referendum.
It has led some MPs to suggest the result of the referendum should be overturned.
Mrs Stuart was a leading figure during the campaign as chair of the Vote Leave board, which made key decisions including about spending.
Speaking to the Birmingham Post, she said: “I have always approached life with a very simple principle, which says political campaigning is unpredictable and complicated enough for you not to get entangled with not playing according to the rules.
“So as far as I was concerned we always complied with the rules as we saw them.
“Now, because there are some referrals to the Metropolitan Police, I wouldn’t want to pre-empt things.
“But I am clear in my mind that we’ve always striven to comply with the rules.”
She said the Electoral Commission had conducted three inquiries into Vote Leave – the first two finding there was nothing untoward – but had never asked to speak to her.
Mrs Stuart pointed out that the Electoral Commission’s data showed remain campaigners spent £19,070,566 in the EU referendum while the various groups campaigning to leave the EU spent £13,436,241. In addition, the Government spent £9,000,000 on a proremain leaflet.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Theresa May is attempting to convince EU leaders to give the UK a deal based on proposals agreed by the Cabinet at a meeting of Chequers.
But the so-called Chequers deal has been rejected by some MPs who support Brexit. Tory backbencher Jacob Rees-Mogg said it would turn the UK into a “vassal state” of the EU.
Mrs Stuart said: “The Chequers proposal to me is the outer limit within which you could deliver what people voted for.
“But when you look at some of the details, which are not yet properly defined, I need some convincing that this is what it does.”
She said voters expected an immigration system with a “level playing field” where people were treated fairly whichever part of the world they came from.
But it seemed that under the Chequers plan, the UK would continue giving preferential treatment to people from Europe.
She also criticised proposals to have a “common rule book”, with Parliament voting on each new rule to ensure the UK complies with the EU.
This would be part of a proposed free trade zone.
Mrs Stuart said: “People put up straw choices. They say, we either have to be bound by European union rules, or it’s going to be like the wild west.
“That’s not true. Every global manufacturer, for every market they sell in to, they comply with the rules of that market.
“The difference is that if you have a trade agreement with India, you have certain rules for the Indian market – but it doesn’t mean that for any domestic production you must have it exactly the same.
“You might choose to, or might not.”
Mrs Stuart also claimed the Government had failed to prepare for Brexit.
“I thought that after the referendum the entire machinery of government, including the Treasury and including Parliament, would you spend energies on making a deal work.
“Whereas what has happened is you have a continuous force which is vacillating between ‘let’s try and undo it’, ‘let’s make the best of a bad job’, and the minority saying ‘hey, this is a real opportunity, how do we get the best deal’.
“And I think it’s been that which has come to a head now.”
Mrs Stuart welcomed the warning from new Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab that the UK would walk away without paying the £39 billion Brexit divorce bill, if the EU refused to agree to a trade deal.
“I was very pleased that Dominic Raab has said that if we get no trade deal then we may have to revisit what the divorce bill is.
“Quite frankly I’d be really surprised if we had a Parliament that would vote through paying the divorce bill without getting anything in exchange.”