This is shamefully complacent stuff from @ElectoralCommUK (electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journal…) but don't take my word for it. Here is what the High Court said. THREAD
Here are some of the High Court's criticisms. /1 
Here are some more. /2
Here is what the Electoral Commission initially said when we threatened to sue them. And what they said just over a month later. /3
Summing up, they initially said our claim had no merit. Then they agreed to take another look. Then found the complete opposite of what they had originally found. Then they fought on on a question of law. And were savaged by the High Court. /4
There is no doubt that they gave the advice they gave to Vote Leave - which they initially denied having given. And there's no suggestion they gave equivalent advice to Stronger In. /5
The right response from the Electoral Commission would not be to pretend all is fine and dandy but to (1) accept that there were serious failings in its management of the Referendum and (2) commission external advice on whether they could reasonably have affected the outcome.
I have to say the Electoral Commission's initial statement reads like that from an organisation that has at the forefront of its mind the interests of its Executives and its Board rather than the public interest. /ENDS
Oh, one further point. The Electoral Commission statement says its advice was generic. But it was sent to Vote Leave, as this email makes clear, and there was no suggestion it was sent to Stronger In (the lead Remain campaign). /REALLY ENDS
