A snap election could be called at any time, and an election held today would be left wide open to abuse.

06 September 2019 | Facts and news from Full Fact
View in your browser ([link removed])


** BLOG
------------------------------------------------------------


** Election law needs to change before any election
------------------------------------------------------------

This week, Full Fact wrote to all MPs and Peers, highlighting recommendations that UK election law needs to be updated before any election.

A snap election could be called at any time, and an election held today would be left wide open to abuse. Emergency legislation and safeguards are needed to protect our next elections from interference and disinformation.

They should, at a minimum, include:
* Transparency of online campaigning
* Transparency of online advertising
* A protocol for warning the public when major interference is detected

Thank you to everyone who shared our call ([link removed]) to safeguard our democracy on social media this week. If you haven't done so, please share on Twitter ([link removed]) and Facebook ([link removed]) .

As a charity committed to promoting informed debate, we work to reduce the harm caused by bad information. Commenting on policy related to this—as well as checking the facts—plays an important part of that.
Read a summary ([link removed])
BECOME A FULL FACT SUPPORTER

Our next election is at risk—support informed debat ([link removed]) e ([link removed])

As a Full Fact reader, you probably believe that informed debate matters. You'd like to see politicians get their facts straight, and policies which promote fairness and accuracy.

But our next election is at risk of interference and disinformation. We need someone exactly like you to help us push for change, before any election is called.

We rely on the generosity of our monthly supporters to help us call out the claims and policies which cause the most harm.

With a potential election being called at any time, can you join them in supporting more informed debate?

Yes, I'll support informed debate ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Would a Brexit extension cost £1 billion a month? ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab claimed on Tuesday that ruling out a no deal Brexit would cost British taxpayers £1 billion a month. This claim was repeated by Prime Minister Boris Johnson during Wednesday’s Prime Ministers Questions.

So we fact checked it twice (first on our own website ([link removed]) , then in ([link removed]) the Independent ([link removed]) ).

This claim is potentially misleading, as it’s based on comparing the cost of any extension specifically to a no deal scenario in which the UK did not pay any of the “divorce bill”, something that the government itself has said it doesn’t want.

Most studies predict that the economic effects of leaving the EU will exceed the benefits of not having to pay the EU membership fee. If we leave with a deal, any extension up to the end of 2020 will not cost us extra.
Extending the truth ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Dominic Cummings didn't say this ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

We’ve seen a post on Facebook ([link removed]) and on Twitter ([link removed]) claiming that the Prime Minister’s chief adviser Dominic Cummings said: “Poor people are poor because they have inferior genes and brains. Rich people are rich because they are superior.”

It’s false. There’s no record of him having written or saying this phrase.
This isn't a quote ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Does stop and search work? ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

In announcing government plans to expand stop and search powers, the new Home Secretary Priti Patel claimed last month that “stop and search works.”

But what does that actually mean? Discussion of stop and search often focuses on its use as a crime deterrent. But this ignores its use as an investigatory power—as well as its possible negative side effects.

We take an in-depth look at stop and search, and what "success" could look like.
Policing the data ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Is £14 billion being spent on education? ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

Last week the government claimed that extra funding for schools in England would total over £14 billion between 2019/20 and 2022/23.

But the £14 billion figure has been described by the Institute for Fiscal studies as “somewhere between meaningless and misleading”, since it cumulatively adds up extra spending over each year, and doesn’t account for inflation. The real terms increase in that time period is £4.3 billion.

We’ve previously written about why it’s wrong for politicians to use inflated figures ([link removed]) .
Mind-bending maths ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** G ([link removed]) att 24: new argument, same problems ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

A recent article in the Telegraph (written by five people including Conservative MP Iain Duncan Smith) claimed that GATT 24 of the World Trade Organisation terms could be a “get out of jail free” card that allows us to leave the EU with “little obvious” change to our trade.

This is misleading. The proposal would significantly change how we trade with the EU, and the EU is unlikely to accept it.

We wrote about GATT 24 four times over the summer ([link removed]) .
Gatt again (again) ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Images of Remain supporters burning Union flag: false ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

This week we came across numerous Facebook posts containing a similar image ([link removed]) of Remain supporters burning a Union flag at a protest.

However, the events portrayed in the images did not happen. An image of a March 2019 Brexit protest has been edited with a photo of a burning flag from a Falklands protest in Argentina.

Flagging falsehoods ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Life expectancy in the UK: stalling, not falling ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

A recent New York Times headline claimed that life expectancy in the UK is falling. Cases of falling life expectancy can be found in certain local authorities, but overall life expectancy is stalling, not falling.

We contacted the The New York Times, which then corrected the headline.
Don't stall for it ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** MPs expenses image isn’t all correct ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

A Facebook post ([link removed]) shared almost 10,000 times claims Iain Duncan Smith gets £77 per day for lunch, amongst other claims about MPs' expenses.

MPs, including Mr Duncan Smith, can claim £25 a night for food if staying overnight outside their constituency and London. The other claims are a mix of true and false.
Lunch on MP ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Muslim knife attacker claim: false ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

A post on Facebook, published in April 2018, claimed that in the past 12 months, 11,000 of the 13,000 knife attacks in London were committed by Muslim immigrants.

There is no evidence to back up the claim about the number of attacks committed by Muslim immigrants, and it is completely implausible.

Unfounded and implausible ([link removed])


** THE OSR NEEDS YOU
------------------------------------------------------------


** The Office for Statistics Regulation wants to hear from you ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

Full Fact's work depends on the ONS, and the statistics it produces.

The Office for Statistics Regulation exists to oversee all official statistics, like those produced by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), to make sure those statistics are independent, and call out those who misuse them.

Right now, the Office for Statistics Regulation wants to hear from you about where it should put its effort.
Check out their consultation ([link removed])


** FACTCHECK
------------------------------------------------------------


** Vaccine cancer claims lack evidence ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

A post on Instagram ([link removed]) has claimed that no vaccine has been tested to see if it causes cancer.

All vaccines have to undergo a series of trial phases, which often last years, to check whether they cause any side effects and there have been studies looking into whether cancer is associated with being vaccinated.

Vaccination misinformation ([link removed])
Thank you very much for your support, and have a great weekend from everyone at Full Fact.

============================================================
** Follow us ([link removed])
** Follow us ([link removed])
** Donate ([link removed])
** Donate ([link removed])
** Like us ([link removed])
** Like us ([link removed])
** Follow us ([link removed])
** Follow us ([link removed])
You can find out how we're funded ** here ([link removed])
.
Copyright © Full Fact 2019 - All rights reserved

Our mailing address is:
2 Carlton Gardens, London, SW1Y 5AA

We use Mailchimp to send you our emails and to see which articles are most popular. ** Read our privacy policy ([link removed])
or ** Mailchimp's privacy policy ([link removed])

** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
** update subscription preferences ([link removed])