Reform UK has come under pressure to provide evidence its candidates at the general election were all real people after doubts were raised about a series of hopefuls who stood without providing any photos, biographies or contact details.

Reform insists every one of its 609 candidates on 4 July were real, while accepting that some were in effect “paper candidates” who did no campaigning, and were there simply to help increase the party’s vote share.

However, after seeing details about the apparently complete lack of information about some candidates, who the Guardian is not naming, the Liberal Democrats called on Reform to provide details about them.

A Liberal Democrat source said: “This doesn’t sound right and Reform should come clean with evidence. We need Reform to show who they are. People need to have faith in the democratic process.”

A series of candidates listed on the Nigel Farage-led party’s election website only show their name and the constituency they stood in, without any information about them, or contact details beyond a generic regional email address.

Many of these people have no visible online presence, and did not appear to do any campaigning. Photographs of the electoral counts for some of the relevant constituencies show that the Reform candidate was the only person not to attend.

  • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    We used to just call these “paper candidates”. All parties field them in seats where they don’t really have a chance.

    I didn’t hear anything from the Lib Dems or Greens in my constituency, because they have no chance of winning. But I know they’re definitely real people.

    • inspectorst@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      Right, but it’s unusual to have masses of candidates that have no online presence, no address, no email address, don’t even show up to the count, etc.

      Think of every seat declaration you saw on election night: the Lib Dem candidate was standing right there on stage, even in Leave-voting Red Wall seats where centrist moderate liberalism is a deposit-losing proposition.

      • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s not all that bizarre, and it’s more common amongst smaller and newer parties.

        I know the Reform candidate for Ilford North through another forum, and he didn’t attend any hustings (because he wasn’t made aware of them), he didn’t attend the Ilford North count because he was helping out at Hornchurch and Upminster, and he didn’t upload his info to Reform’s site because he was too busy leafletting and doing his regular political job in the London Assembly.

        • inspectorst@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          5 months ago

          The lowest Lib Dem vote share in the country was recorded in Ynys Mon, where Leena Farhat got 439 votes or 1.4% - the most ‘paper’ of paper candidates the Lib Dems will have put up. I typed her name into Google and it took me seconds to find her Twitter, her LinkedIn, her local campaign page, and many photos of her.

          It’s a bit unusual for any adult in 2024 to have no online presence, but especially when a party that appears to have won the third largest vote in a UK-wide election appears to have multiple people among their purported candidates who all have no online presence…

    • then_three_more@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      The article says that’s what reform is claiming they were.

      The concern is that they were not even that. If they’ve just put names down without actually finding a real people to go behind them then it’s open and shut electoral fraud.

        • then_three_more@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          They also had to russle up a lot of candidates and hope to hell that no dirt was dragged up about them because there wasn’t time to vet them.

          You need to have people to nominate the candidate

          10 per candidate. However, they could easily have just been given the name and told that’s who they were nominating.

          to be handed in by either the election agent or the candidate themselves.

          Unlike voting don’t need to present ID to be a candidate. So a couple of people could have made their way around presenting papers.