HOW TO TALK ABOUT THE EVIDENCE You recognise how serious these allegations of wrongdoing and foul play are. But you’re not sure how to explain this to your friends and family. It is absolutely vital that we all share the whistleblower evidence with everyone that we know. Some key points to remember:

• This is bigger than Brexit. • You are not trying to change minds about whether or not the UK

should leave the EU. You might be asked…does this mean more uncertainty?

• NO! A fair vote on Brexit will end the uncertainty surrounding the referendum and send a definitive message that Brits don’t cheat.

• This is our democracy and it is vital that we make sure we get it right.

Here are a few helpful tips to open the conversation:

• Explain why you’re there. “Over the last few days, we’ve seen and heard disturbing evidence that suggests Vote Leave, the official referendum campaign, may have cheated in the last referendum.”

• Further clarify: “They may have done this by spending up to a million more pounds then they were allowed to, coordinating with a “separate” campaign group.

• Find common ground and explain what brings us together. “No matter how we voted in the referendum, we can all agree that some things - like Democracy - are bigger than Brexit.. This evidence suggests the Vote Leave campaign cheated and denied us the right to a fair vote.”

• Bring it to a close with something that unites us and doesn’t divide us: “We all value our democracy and deserve for our voices to be heard.”

• Finish with a definitive ask: “Will you write to your MP? Will you join me at a Fair Vote rally to stand up against cheating? Will you share the evidence with your family and friends?”

• Thank them for their time and let them know they can go to FairVote.UK

What Happened? We’ve seen and heard disturbing evidence that suggests Vote Leave, the official referendum campaign, may have cheated in the referendum. They may have done this by spending up to a million more pounds then they were allowed to, coordinating with a “separate” campaign group. Some of the people involved are now top advisors to Prime Minister Theresa May. Upon announcement of an investigation – a senior Vote Leave staff member, Victoria Woodcock, went through a drive shared by Vote Leave, BeLeave and AIQ restricting access for herself , Dominic Cummings and Henry de Zoete from hundreds of documents. Was this an attempt to preserve evidence, or to delete it According to the Electoral Commission, campaigns are “highly likely to be working together if:” 01 You Spend Money On Joint Advertising Campaigns, Leaflets Or Events 02 You Coordinate Your Spending With Another Campaigner 03 Another Campaigner Can Approve Or Has Significant Influence Over Your Spending

And what appears to have happened?

01 Vote Leave And BeLeave Appear To Have Coordinated With The

Same Digital Strategy Vendor, AIQ

02 BeLeave Appears To Have Been Assigned Specific Responsibility

For Youth Audiences By Vote Leave

03 BeLeave Was Based At Vote Leave HQ, And Appears To Have

Reported To Vote Leave Directors And Shared All Information With

Their Staff

The Evidence

Claim One Vote Leave created and closely managed BeLeave New whistleblower evidence suggests BeLeave was overseen by and integrated with Vote Leave. It operated out of its headquarters throughout the referendum period and advised on bank account set-up and campaigning tools creation. It also appears the Vote Leave lawyer drafted the constitution for BeLeave. The evidence is clear that these two organisations were very closely coordinated, but what about after the donation was made to AIQ? There’s nothing wrong with campaigns coordinating if they share a spending limit. According to Electoral Law, money spent in a coordinated campaign should all be declared by the designated group. In this case, Vote Leave. Claim One Evidence One

This email suggests Vote Leave and Beleave were coordinating during the campaign before the AIQ payment. It shows direct advice being given to BeLeave team members by Vote Leave staff around how to manage finances.

Claim One Evidence Two This email is from William Norton, who listed his responsibilities as including electoral law compliance for Vote Leave, to Shahmir Sanni, Company Secretary of BeLeave and Darren Grimes, Director of BeLeave. It suggests that he has written the BeLeave constitution. There is nothing wrong with groups coordinating unless they kept coordinating after the donation. Is that what they did here?

Claim One Evidence Three

This is BeLeave’s logo right next to Vote Leave’s logo. They are effectively identical. Claim One Evidence Four

This email shows Chloe Wesley, Outreach Assistant at Vote Leave, sending “Mailchimp” email communication system login details to Darren Grimes, Director of BeLeave. If they weren’t coordinated campaigns, why was a Vote Leave staff member setting up emailing tools for BeLeave?

Claim Two Vote Leave coordinated their work with BeLeave both before and after the payment to AIQ. The whistleblower evidence suggests Vote Leave coordinated their work with BeLeave and AIQ, the company closely linked to now disgraced Cambridge Analytica. BeLeave team members sought approval for activities, BeLeave team members and AIQ staff worked from Vote Leave headquarters and BeLeave team members took part in Vote Leave campaigning activities. Claim Two Evidence One

This is an email from Shahmir Sanni, Company Secretary of BeLeave to Stephen Parkison, senior staff member at Vote Leave. In it, Shahmir shares draft remarks and says “feel free to say no to all of it…” This looks like a line manager relationship which suggests BeLeave and Vote Leave were coordinating. While before the payment to AIQ, how could they extract themselves after the payment?

Claim Two Evidence Two This screenshot of a Google Drive highlights who had access to the BeLeave folder on the drive. It includes several senior Vote Leave staff members, employees of AggregrateIQ – the data firm both campaigns used that is linked to the now disgraced Cambridge Analytica – and Shahmir Sanni, Company Secretary of BeLeave. AIQ claim the work was siloed but they are in Canada and we can’t test that claim without proper evidence from them.

Claim Two Evidence Three

These images show 1. Victoria Woodcock, a senior Vote Leave staff member, attached to the BeLeave storage drive after the payment was made to AIQ and 2. Clearly displays that BeLeave’s files were accessible to anyone with a Vote Leave email address with the link. These suggest coordination of work.

Claim Two Evidence Four, Five, and Six These following photos show the Director and Company Secretary campaigning for Vote Leave in the last week of the election (note the wording of the leaflet) and the Company Secretary of BeLeave – Shahmir Sanni – in Vote Leave Headquarters with Chloe Westley, a Vote Leave staff member. The third image shows Stephen Parkinson, senior staff member of Vote Leave, with Zach Massingham, CEO of AggregateIQ, in Vote Leave headquarters where BeLeave was also based. That they shared office space and campaigned for one another suggests coordination.

Claim Three Vote Leave’s alleged overspend went to AggregateIQ, which is closely linked to Cambridge Analytica Vote Leave paid AIQ £625,000 – supposedly on behalf of and as a donation to BeLeave. But how could that amount of money, the biggest single expense in the campaign, have all been spent on a tiny youth group’s social media campaign in the last 10 days of the referendum?

Claim Three Evidence 1

This letter, submitted to the ICO by Darren Grimes, states “I did not undertake any working together with Vote Leave Ltd, I had no involvement with Vote Leave Ltd’s work with AggregrateIQ Data Service Limited or any other companies.” It also suggests BeLeave’s ad campaign with Aggregate IQ only produced the collection of 1,164 email addresses. That’s £580 per email whereas Dominic Cummings, Campaign Director of Vote Leave, said their program with AggregateIQ brought in 350,000 emails, which works out to £10 per email signup assuming their declared payment to AggregateIQ of £3.2 million is true. How could this cost be so different if they were using the same supplier?

Claim 3 Evidence 2

This letter exchanged between BeLeave staff and the Electoral Commission acknowledges that £625,000 went to AggregateIQ from VoteLeave as a payment for “digital marketing work you [BeLeave] had engaged them to undertake.” Since the evidence confirms they used the same data supplier, there is a suggestion that the payment to AggregateIQ was used for both Vote Leave and BeLeave campaigns or at least in coordinated campaigning. If so, Vote Leave exceeded its spending limits by a very significant amount.

Claim Three Evidence Three

This is a screenshot of conversations between BeLeave volunteers and AIQ staff member Zack Massingham. In it Zack says “it’s actually better to target by interests.” If BeLeave had very little data, where was AIQ getting this knowledge for targeting?

Claim Three Evidence Four

This is another screenshot of conversations between BeLeave volunteers and AIQ staff member Zack Massingham. Shahmir Sanni believed that “hard stuff” referred to Vote Leave’s more direct messages aimed at traditional Leave supporters compared to BeLeave’s softer tone aimed at young progressives. Does this mean they were assigned specific responsibility of certain audiences?

Claim Four People involved were less than truthful when the authorities started to investigate. After the authorities started to investigate, emails were deleted, the young volunteers were instructed what to say, and a senior Vote Leave staff member, Victoria Woodcock, went through a drive shared by Vote Leave, BeLeave and AIQ removing access for herself, Dominic Cummings and Henry de Zoete from hundreds of documents. We don’t know why she did this. Was this an attempt to preserve evidence, or to delete it? This video shows the hundreds of files that Vote Leave senior staff member Victoria Woodcock removed access to for herself, Henry de Zoete and Dominic Cummings, Campaign Director of Vote Leave. The date stamp indicates this occurred a few weeks after the Electoral Commission started to investigate. Is this an attempt to preserve evidence or cover up? Note: this piece of evidence is multimedia. Visit fairvote.uk/evidence to view.

Do you have more evidence? Cheating is wrong no matter who does it. What we know so far suggests Vote Leave may have cheated to win the referendum. If you have other evidence about cheating on either side, please reach out to us and share it. We will work to get it to the appropriate institutions. We take this responsibility very seriously.

GUIDE TO ACTION There are 3 essential steps you can take to ensure the most effective impact:

Step 1: Join + support the campaign This is a grassroots national movement. All across the country, passionate individuals are coming together to build support from the ground up. By joining the Fair Vote Project, you can join your friends and neighbours at local rallies and events to build a mandate for a fair vote. We rely on support from people like you to continue fighting. By supporting our crowdfunder, you can assert your commitment to upholding and protecting our democracy and help us spread the word to every corner of the country.

Step 2: Speak Out to your MP We need every MP in Westminster to stand up for our democracy and support a fair vote on Brexit. You can contact your MP by: Tweeting at them! Tell them publicly and often: “I want a fair vote on our country’s future. #FairVoteNOW” Writing them an email or letter. Find their contact details on our site. Most importantly, visiting them at their constituency offices and surgeries. Parliament is on recess for most of April which means your MP will be at home and looking to hear from you and your neighbours on what you want them to do. Make sure your voice is heard!

Step 3: Share the evidence Remember to spread the evidence as far and wide as possible. We are relying on you to get the message out and demand a fair vote. This is bigger than Brexit. A fair vote can provide clarity and certainty. It must end the debate once and for all.