There is something that badly stinks about the Peterborough by-election and its result in a Labour win. It’s the whiff of electoral fraud and corruption that doesn’t seem to be going away.

The Labour win, by a margin of less than seven hundred votes, in a seat which could be expected to turn away from Labour after their previous Labour MP turned to be a criminal, was a bit of a shock result. So much so that many are quite rightly asking questions as to how this result occurred.

These questions are particularly pertinent when one realises that the postal vote turnout was significantly higher than the turnout at the voting booth. It was the sort of postal vote turnout that one would expect to see at a General Election rather than a by-election. Granted that it is possible to accept that people who take the time and effort to apply for a postal vote, are more motivated to use this vote, but I’m increasingly convinced that this is not the case in the Peterborough contest. The alleged involvement of a convicted Muslim vote fraudster who is said to have got the Muslim vote out for Labour, should also be a matter of public concern. Although the Labour Party deny that the vote fraudster, Tariq Mahmood, was officially involved in the Lisa Forbes campaign, Tory party members from the local area have seen Mahmood actively involved in campaigning for Labour among Peterborough’s Muslims.

Mahmood and by extension the Peterborough Muslim community have ‘form’ when it comes to taking part and running bent elections. In 2008 Mahmood, at that time a Labour Party branch secretary, was one of six men, three each from Labour and the Tories, who were convicted of vote rigging offences relating to a 2004 local council election. Mahmood was gaoled for 15 months in 2008 for his part in this vote rigging scandal.

It is disturbing to see a man who is quite easily described as a villain and who should never, because of his vote fraud conviction, be allowed anywhere near any political campaign. Labour especially should have been wary about the implications of Mahmood’s presence wearing a red rosette and I really don’t completely buy Labour’s excuse that Mahmood was not officially involved in the campaign. Labour expected the Muslim community to deliver votes and some unnamed Labour MP’s told the Mail newspaper that they expected that the Muslim vote would ‘rescue’ Labour in Peterborough. This claimed declared expectation of being delivered the Islamic communal vote and Mahmood’s part in bringing that vote to Labour should make us all suspicious about what has gone on in Peterborough and in this very high profile by-election.

What this result teaches us is that the Labour Party doesn’t really care that much how it wins or what damage is done to the public’s confidence in the electoral process by unfair elections or even if the votes they get are honest ones from real voters, only that they win. Labour will use any means necessary, even by using a Muslim community whose members all too often make the lives of Labour’s traditional working class supporters (of all races) an absolute misery. The whipped and possibly dishonest Mosque vote, not the Labour Party was the winner in Peterborough and it is right and proper that people become angry and disturbed by this occurrence.

I would strongly suggest that people contact the Electoral Commission with their concerns about this election and how it was run. Elections must as far as practicable be a level playing field. It becomes an extremely distorted field when one party is harvesting the votes of one community whose interests often clash with those of other Britons. We have a situation in the United Kingdom where the basic requirement for an honest vote, that the voter exists and it is voting honestly, is being eroded.

As I said earlier, the sort term tactic should be to raise your concerns with the Electoral Commission but the long term solution to this problem, and its a problem which will grow I’m afraid, is to have a twin prong attack on electoral dishonesty. This must address the issue of postal voting and voter identification.

Firstly the facility of postal votes and proxy votes needs to be withdrawn for all except a small category of those who either cannot reach a polling station due to disability, or who are serving in HM Armed Forces and cannot vote in their home constituency. Whilst I accept that postal voting on demand has increased turnout at elections, the unintended consequences and costs of free for all postal voting has been the corruption and exploitation of Britain’s electoral system.

The matter of introducing voter identification should be for the government of the day and for the Electoral Commission a ‘no brainer’ of a policy. It should in my view be a requirement for voting that the voter is who they say they are. I would have no problem producing a driving licence or passport in order to vote and I suspect that there are many other documents and forms of ID that a person could use if they did not possess either of these two documents. It is vital that those who present themselves at polling stations to vote are the voter themselves and actually exist. This would also prevent to a certain extent multiple voting, which is another problem that Britain seems to have imported with Islam (along with terror, mass gang rapes, class a drug distribution, bullying, arrogance and anti social behaviour). It’s not ‘one man one vote’ if Mr Mohammed has ten votes to everyone else’s one vote is it?

Something is really not right with the Peterborough by-election contest of that I am becoming increasingly convinced of this. My belief that something is rotten in another area where Labour have taken a seat comes from both the reasons I gave earlier and as I said in my other piece on this issue written in the immediate aftermath of the Peterborough vote. The scale of the Labour ‘victory’, the involvement of questionable vote fraudsters in getting the Labour vote out along with the difference between voting patterns at this by-election and previous Peterborough elections going back to the 19^th century, all point to something being wrong.

This was in my view a travesty of an election won, if you can put it that way, by a party that has become itself a travesty of its history as a party for the working man. Labour has become the party most associated with the collection of fraudulent Muslim votes even when the cost of these votes is pro-Islam policies that damage the rights of all other Britons but especially Britain’s working classes.