Well the Miller thing hasn't moved VI so it's just yet another of these "massive scandals" on PB that the general public aren't scandalised about. See also: Falkirk, Ashcroft, Rennard.
Bloody Sky News is live listening to Pistorius bleat and puke, when the real story of the day is back in Westminster. Does anyone know how it works? Will Sky have polled viewers to find out if they want to watch it, or is it just a call Sky make?
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
You of all people, antifrank!
Cameron didn't principally show loyalty to a minister, he showed respect for due 'judicial' process.
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
LOL not this old saw. He fancied the job and he went for it, getting the nod against all odds. Wipe the sleep from your eyes and come up with something nearer your usual high standards.
Well I am glad she has gone. Cameron has damaged himself by seeking to defend the indefensible.
When the expenses scandal started Cameron did some good speeches and Cameron directs where he showed a better awareness than most of how this was perceived but since coming into government he has lost the plot. I still don't think Westminster as a whole gets how angry people were about the expenses issue and how easy it is to relight the flame.
Cameron would have been much better taking a stand and deciding that failing to cooperate with the inquiry was incompatible with cabinet status. He gets no credit from her resigning at this point.
Even better if she had had some principles and fell on her sword when caught. Again highlights the fact that current Tories are out of touch with reality.
Maria Miller was entirely right to say, in her resignation letter, that she had become a distraction. She was draining attention away from everything the Government was trying to do. ConHome’s poll, published last night, confirmed the overwhelming desire on the part of Conservatives that she should go. She had become, not quite justly, a focus for the public’s indignation against a political class which is seen as venal and self-interested.
The general feeling this morning will be that she has done the right thing, but has done it too late. Here too, Miller was not very quick to recognise that her departure had become inevitable. Nor was Downing Street very quick to concede this point. This dogged refusal to admit defeat inflamed the very hostility it was supposed to vanquish. But Miller’s vain resistance has at least demonstrated that David Cameron is disinclined to abandon a loyal minister until that course has become unavoidable.
Bloody Sky News is live listening to Pistorius bleat and puke, when the real story of the day is back in Westminster. Does anyone know how it works? Will Sky have polled viewers to find out if they want to watch it, or is it just a call Sky make?
As Henry Ford said, 'If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.'
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
LOL not this old saw. He fancied the job and he went for it, getting the nod against all odds. Wipe the sleep from your eyes and come up with something nearer your usual high standards.
It's about a few lines to get David Cameron through Prime Minister's Questions, not about preparing a definitive historical treatise of the first two decades of the 21st century. Whether it's true or fair is beside the point. It's not particularly true or fair to suggest that Maria Miller has done anything particularly heinous by the standards of her peers, but that doesn't make David Cameron's position any more comfortable.
Bloody Sky News is live listening to Pistorius bleat and puke, when the real story of the day is back in Westminster. Does anyone know how it works? Will Sky have polled viewers to find out if they want to watch it, or is it just a call Sky make?
Couldn't believe that even C4 news led with that story last night.
Bloody Sky News is live listening to Pistorius bleat and puke, when the real story of the day is back in Westminster. Does anyone know how it works? Will Sky have polled viewers to find out if they want to watch it, or is it just a call Sky make?
There was a piece up a few weeks ago, showing Sky News ratings get a boost from Oscar Pistorious stuff.
Has its roots from the 90s when they covered the OJ Simpson trial.
Cameron should not have sacked Miller for her acquittal by the committee. Cameron should have sacked Miller for her contempt for parliament in her attempt to block the enquiry and subsequent tweet length apology.
He didn't recognise her contempt for parliament because his own contempt for parliament blinded him to it.
Now then, below I have been suggested as the left's version of AveryLP. Should I be proud of such a nomination......?
Bloody Sky News is live listening to Pistorius bleat and puke, when the real story of the day is back in Westminster. Does anyone know how it works? Will Sky have polled viewers to find out if they want to watch it, or is it just a call Sky make?
As Henry Ford said, 'If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.'
Much better. One of my all-time favourite quotes. One to live ones life by, particularly in business.
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
LOL not this old saw. He fancied the job and he went for it, getting the nod against all odds. Wipe the sleep from your eyes and come up with something nearer your usual high standards.
And of course, it didn't cause any family ructions?
Ed's going for the job, and the resultant long-standing feud with his brother, is mainly a familial tragedy. I don't criticise him much over it: there's plenty else to go on that is much more relevant to his ability to lead the country.
For instance, it's PMQ's today. Will Ed apologise to Mitchell? Of course not.
Hard to imagine how no10 could have handled this worse.
Yes but at least there's now some real betting on PB on her replacement with no repulsive bet welchers turning our stomachs with revolting and ghastly excuses.
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
LOL not this old saw. He fancied the job and he went for it, getting the nod against all odds. Wipe the sleep from your eyes and come up with something nearer your usual high standards.
It's about a few lines to get David Cameron through Prime Minister's Questions, not about preparing a definitive historical treatise of the first two decades of the 21st century. Whether it's true or fair is beside the point. It's not particularly true or fair to suggest that Maria Miller has done anything particularly heinous by the standards of her peers, but that doesn't make David Cameron's position any more comfortable.
If he relies on that crutch he really has lost it. A) Ed did nothing wrong it's ancient history.
I tweeted Sky News last time they showed the Pistorius trial live complaining we didn't want it and they should put it on the red button. If enough people do, they will.
Wonder what would happen if another cabinet minister was found to have done more or less the same thing as Miller and it was revealed, lets just say just before the Euros ;-)
An "expenses saint" from the party of expenses sinners.....remind me, how many Conservative MPs went to prison?
This is the measure of Cameron's incompetance.
All he had to do was sack Miller and he would have looked strong and principled.
Instead the Conservatives have become associated with sleeze when it was Labour MPs who were the worst for it.
What do the hell do they teach on that PPE course for anyone to blunder like Cameron has done on this issue.
ar
You were shedding the Normanby Hall curse yesterday in your comments on the ERM and Black Wednesday.
Now you are returning to roots.
No Prime Minister will sack a Minister after an 'acquittal' by a 'quasi judicial' body. Not Blair, Not Brown, Not Major, Not Thatcher.
Prime Ministers must respect due process and uphold the rule of law.
In the circumstances of a popular witch hunt whipped up by a bloodthirsty press (and there have been many of these), then the procedure PMs follow is to wait until the hunted Minister resigns.
It says no more or less about Cameron's competence than similar precedents do about his predecessors.
At least Thatcher had the courage to refuse John Nott's resignation after the Falklands invasion.
Cameron could have sacked Miller and made some 'I said lessons would be learned and they have been, ministers must not only have clean expenses but they must be seen to have clean expenses, Maria Miller has failed that test and must go'.
Or he could have told her to resign straight away and make the speech herself.
Admit it Avery your boy Cameron has fcked up on the issue.
NO, ar.
Parliament has its own established procedure for investigating and ruling on complaints relating to expense claims. It is not a government responsibility.
Complaints are first investigated by an independent Commissioner, whose report is then considered by a cross-party HoC Standards Committee with three additional independents sitting.
This process has been followed and it has reached a ruling.
It is NOT for any Prime Minister to disregard, preempt or overrule Parliamentary authority.
Cameron's only option was to wait for Miller to resign.
Wonder what would happen if another cabinet minister was found to have done more or less the same thing as Miller and it was revealed, lets just say just before the Euros ;-)
The front benches of all parties have MPs who have claimed the same or similar expenses to Maria Miller.
As good place to start, if you want to continue the witch hunt, would be Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper.
An "expenses saint" from the party of expenses sinners.....remind me, how many Conservative MPs went to prison?
This is the measure of Cameron's incompetance.
All he had to do was sack Miller and he would have looked strong and principled.
Instead the Conservatives have become associated with sleeze when it was Labour MPs who were the worst for it.
What do the hell do they teach on that PPE course for anyone to blunder like Cameron has done on this issue.
ar
You were shedding the Normanby Hall curse yesterday in your comments on the ERM and Black Wednesday.
Now you are returning to roots.
No Prime Minister will sack a Minister after an 'acquittal' by a 'quasi judicial' body. Not Blair, Not Brown, Not Major, Not Thatcher.
Prime Ministers must respect due process and uphold the rule of law.
In the circumstances of a popular witch hunt whipped up by a bloodthirsty press (and there have been many of these), then the procedure PMs follow is to wait until the hunted Minister resigns.
It says no more or less about Cameron's competence than similar precedents do about his predecessors.
At least Thatcher had the courage to refuse John Nott's resignation after the Falklands invasion.
Cameron could have sacked Miller and made some 'I said lessons would be learned and they have been, ministers must not only have clean expenses but they must be seen to have clean expenses, Maria Miller has failed that test and must go'.
Or he could have told her to resign straight away and make the speech herself.
Admit it Avery your boy Cameron has fcked up on the issue.
NO, ar.
Parliament has its own established procedure for investigating and ruling on complaints relating to expense claims. It is not a government responsibility.
Complaints are first investigated by an independent Commissioner, whose report is then considered by a cross-party HoC Standards Committee with three additional independents sitting.
This process has been followed and it has reached a ruling.
It is NOT for any Prime Minister to disregard, preempt or overrule Parliamentary authority.
Cameron's only option was to wait for Miller to resign.
Someone should have suggested to her that she resign last week.
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
LOL not this old saw. He fancied the job and he went for it, getting the nod against all odds. Wipe the sleep from your eyes and come up with something nearer your usual high standards.
It's about a few lines to get David Cameron through Prime Minister's Questions, not about preparing a definitive historical treatise of the first two decades of the 21st century. Whether it's true or fair is beside the point. It's not particularly true or fair to suggest that Maria Miller has done anything particularly heinous by the standards of her peers, but that doesn't make David Cameron's position any more comfortable.
If he relies on that crutch he really has lost it. A) Ed did nothing wrong it's ancient history.
It's not ancient history for as long as Ed Miliband is leader. And while I agree with you that Ed Miliband did nothing wrong, that's not the public's view.
David Cameron does not in any case need to say that he did anything wrong. Some sentence along the lines of "the front bench opposite already knows from the leadership election that he struggles with the concept of loyalty" will be quite enough to slide the stiletto between the ribs.
Mr. Easterross, I quite agree with your sentiment, but prefer to just boycott the channel (I usually watch it whilst having dinner) until they stop the saturation coverage. I also think it's unseemly to transform a case involving the killing of a woman and the murder trial of a man into some sort of spectator sport. It's precisely this sort of thing which makes me loathe to support cameras in courts. Last evening some Sky presenter or other (was channel-hopping and caught just this bit) was smiling and laughing at the end of the coverage. A woman died and a man's on trial for murder, it's not a laughing matter (reminds me of George Alagiah[sp] grinning when covering the 2007 floods in Yorkshire, which royally pissed me off).
On Miller: stayed long enough to do damage. Not clever. That said, the media seem to have done their utmost to damage someone pretty much cleared by the independent regulator.
Moniker is well qualified to comment on hypocrisy, given that he regularly predicts Labour will "struggle to get 28% at the GE" then runs away like a coward when offered a bet on his risible contention.
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
LOL not this old saw. He fancied the job and he went for it, getting the nod against all odds. Wipe the sleep from your eyes and come up with something nearer your usual high standards.
It's about a few lines to get David Cameron through Prime Minister's Questions, not about preparing a definitive historical treatise of the first two decades of the 21st century. Whether it's true or fair is beside the point. It's not particularly true or fair to suggest that Maria Miller has done anything particularly heinous by the standards of her peers, but that doesn't make David Cameron's position any more comfortable.
If he relies on that crutch he really has lost it. A) Ed did nothing wrong it's ancient history.
Not at all. As so many other posters have already freely said Cammie needs to go big on loyalty. Loyalty is thing important thing. There's no shame in loyalty and loyalty will never backfire. It's definitely not about judgement it's about loyalty above all else.
Wonder what would happen if another cabinet minister was found to have done more or less the same thing as Miller and it was revealed, lets just say just before the Euros ;-)
The front benches of all parties have MPs who have claimed the same or similar expenses to Maria Miller.
As good place to start, if you want to continue the witch hunt, would be Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper.
But there are plenty more.
Now, if I was that paper and I wanted to make the biggest headlines, I would forget the Euro's and wait until the about a week before the general election. It would make bigger headlines and would make the said minister sweat like a whore at a christening until then. The only problem with this is the said minister may get the hoof in the Euro re-shuffle so it's a tough decision when to go public really......that is if there is a high profile minister with this hanging over him/her......obviously.
I haven't followed the Maria Miller story but from my limited perspective, I consider her performance in Parliament to have been her undoing as much as anything else. The route to redemption lies through the twin villages of humiliation and contrition and by-passing these won't get you anywhere good.
In the expenses scandal, those who confessed and apologised did much better than those who tried to prevaricate and argue. The court of Parliament is, it seems to many, far more forgiving than the court of public opinion and although Miller's supporters rightly assert that she has done nothing wrong, that isn't really the point.
Timing is also everything and nothing as is media management. This story was allowed to gain traction and momentum in the latter part of last week and over the weekend. Again, there will be those who protest her innocence and salute David Cameron for loyally sticking by her but that's not the point either - she became a liability long before she recognised that and she has had to walk. As we have also seen, the wilderness, like the Championship, can be an easy place to get into but a hard one to leave.
An "expenses saint" from the party of expenses sinners.....remind me, how many Conservative MPs went to prison?
This is the measure of Cameron's incompetance.
All he had to do was sack Miller and he would have looked strong and principled.
Instead the Conservatives have become associated with sleeze when it was Labour MPs who were the worst for it.
What do the hell do they teach on that PPE course for anyone to blunder like Cameron has done on this issue.
ar
You were shedding the Normanby Hall curse yesterday in your comments on the ERM and Black Wednesday.
Now you are returning to roots.
No Prime Minister will sack a Minister after an 'acquittal' by a 'quasi judicial' body. Not Blair, Not Brown, Not Major, Not Thatcher.
Prime Ministers must respect due process and uphold the rule of law.
In the circumstances of a popular witch hunt whipped up by a bloodthirsty press (and there have been many of these), then the procedure PMs follow is to wait until the hunted Minister resigns.
It says no more or less about Cameron's competence than similar precedents do about his predecessors.
At least Thatcher had the courage to refuse John Nott's resignation after the Falklands invasion.
Cameron could have sacked Miller and made some 'I said lessons would be learned and they have been, ministers must not only have clean expenses but they must be seen to have clean expenses, Maria Miller has failed that test and must go'.
Or he could have told her to resign straight away and make the speech herself.
Admit it Avery your boy Cameron has fcked up on the issue.
NO, ar.
Parliament has its own established procedure for investigating and ruling on complaints relating to expense claims. It is not a government responsibility.
Complaints are first investigated by an independent Commissioner, whose report is then considered by a cross-party HoC Standards Committee with three additional independents sitting.
This process has been followed and it has reached a ruling.
It is NOT for any Prime Minister to disregard, preempt or overrule Parliamentary authority.
Cameron's only option was to wait for Miller to resign.
Crap.
The HoC committee makes judgements regarding a politician's fitness to be in the HoC not in the cabinet.
Its entirely Cameron's decision as to who is a member of his cabinet and to what standards cabinet ministers have to reach.
If he doesn't think they're morally or ethically deserving of a position then they go.
As with so many of this things, I very much doubt Ed and David's travails have any salience with the public.
The only people it seems to bother are Tory PBers like Morris and Josias who express deep and heartfelt concern for David Miliband and the effect on Milibandian familial relations.
Cameron should not have sacked Miller for her acquittal by the committee. Cameron should have sacked Miller for her contempt for parliament in her attempt to block the enquiry and subsequent tweet length apology.
He didn't recognise her contempt for parliament because his own contempt for parliament blinded him to it.
Now then, below I have been suggested as the left's version of AveryLP. Should I be proud of such a nomination......?
If you can make plenty of failed polling predictions and you can post yellow boxes full of sewage......you are in!
I haven't followed the Maria Miller story but from my limited perspective, I consider her performance in Parliament to have been her undoing as much as anything else. The route to redemption lies through the twin villages of humiliation and contrition and by-passing these won't get you anywhere good.
In the expenses scandal, those who confessed and apologised did much better than those who tried to prevaricate and argue. The court of Parliament is, it seems to many, far more forgiving than the court of public opinion and although Miller's supporters rightly assert that she has done nothing wrong, that isn't really the point.
Timing is also everything and nothing as is media management. This story was allowed to gain traction and momentum in the latter part of last week and over the weekend. Again, there will be those who protest her innocence and salute David Cameron for loyally sticking by her but that's not the point either - she became a liability long before she recognised that and she has had to walk. As we have also seen, the wilderness, like the Championship, can be an easy place to get into but a hard one to leave.
Great post, Stodge.
Media and peer management was Maria's failure. Particularly surprising given her background was in PR.
Wonder what would happen if another cabinet minister was found to have done more or less the same thing as Miller and it was revealed, lets just say just before the Euros ;-)
The front benches of all parties have MPs who have claimed the same or similar expenses to Maria Miller.
As good place to start, if you want to continue the witch hunt, would be Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper.
But there are plenty more.
Now, if I was that paper and I wanted to make the biggest headlines, I would forget the Euro's and wait until the about a week before the general election. It would make bigger headlines and would make the said minister sweat like a whore at a christening until then. The only problem with this is the said minister may get the hoof in the Euro re-shuffle so it's a tough decision when to go public really......that is if there is a high profile minister with this hanging over him/her......obviously.
I haven't followed the Maria Miller story but from my limited perspective, I consider her performance in Parliament to have been her undoing as much as anything else. The route to redemption lies through the twin villages of humiliation and contrition and by-passing these won't get you anywhere good.
In the expenses scandal, those who confessed and apologised did much better than those who tried to prevaricate and argue. The court of Parliament is, it seems to many, far more forgiving than the court of public opinion and although Miller's supporters rightly assert that she has done nothing wrong, that isn't really the point.
Timing is also everything and nothing as is media management. This story was allowed to gain traction and momentum in the latter part of last week and over the weekend. Again, there will be those who protest her innocence and salute David Cameron for loyally sticking by her but that's not the point either - she became a liability long before she recognised that and she has had to walk. As we have also seen, the wilderness, like the Championship, can be an easy place to get into but a hard one to leave.
If Miller had been size 10 and glamorous she'd still be in a job - fact.
The other thing about Basingstoke is that I am assuming that LAB have a half-decent GOTV operation in seats like this (evidence = over 10,000 votes last time), whereas I'm assuming that UKIP will have to largely ignore the vast majority of seats, including perhaps this one?
I'm a local (albeit in Sir George's seat - changed because couldn't stand Andrew Hunter). Ain't happening
I haven't followed the Maria Miller story but from my limited perspective, I consider her performance in Parliament to have been her undoing as much as anything else. The route to redemption lies through the twin villages of humiliation and contrition and by-passing these won't get you anywhere good.
In the expenses scandal, those who confessed and apologised did much better than those who tried to prevaricate and argue. The court of Parliament is, it seems to many, far more forgiving than the court of public opinion and although Miller's supporters rightly assert that she has done nothing wrong, that isn't really the point.
Timing is also everything and nothing as is media management. This story was allowed to gain traction and momentum in the latter part of last week and over the weekend. Again, there will be those who protest her innocence and salute David Cameron for loyally sticking by her but that's not the point either - she became a liability long before she recognised that and she has had to walk. As we have also seen, the wilderness, like the Championship, can be an easy place to get into but a hard one to leave.
To be fair even CCHQ don't have spinners as wonderfully inept and out of touch as Avery and some of his PB tory chums. It's admittedly an extremely close run thing at times though as this week has proved.
'One silver lining for Cameron: At least PMQs won't now be dominated by terrible news that UK economic growth of 2.9% is fastest in the G7' @mattchorley
Wonder what would happen if another cabinet minister was found to have done more or less the same thing as Miller and it was revealed, lets just say just before the Euros ;-)
The front benches of all parties have MPs who have claimed the same or similar expenses to Maria Miller.
As good place to start, if you want to continue the witch hunt, would be Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper.
But there are plenty more.
It wasn't just the expenses though. It was her convenient lack of records and her refusal to co-operate with the inquiry.
Wonder what would happen if another cabinet minister was found to have done more or less the same thing as Miller and it was revealed, lets just say just before the Euros ;-)
The front benches of all parties have MPs who have claimed the same or similar expenses to Maria Miller.
As good place to start, if you want to continue the witch hunt, would be Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper.
But there are plenty more.
Now, if I was that paper and I wanted to make the biggest headlines, I would forget the Euro's and wait until the about a week before the general election. It would make bigger headlines and would make the said minister sweat like a whore at a christening until then. The only problem with this is the said minister may get the hoof in the Euro re-shuffle so it's a tough decision when to go public really......that is if there is a high profile minister with this hanging over him/her......obviously.
As with so many of this things, I very much doubt Ed and David's travails have any salience with the public.
The only people it seems to bother are Tory PBers like Morris and Josias who express deep and heartfelt concern for David Miliband and the effect on Milibandian familial relations.
I can't tell you how surprised I am that you think that a part of Ed Miliband's back story that is unflattering to him lacks salience.
It's more or less the only thing the public know about him.
An "expenses saint" from the party of expenses sinners.....remind me, how many Conservative MPs went to prison?
This is the measure of Cameron's incompetance.
All he had to do was sack Miller and he would have looked strong and principled.
Instead the Conservatives have become associated with sleeze when it was Labour MPs who were the worst for it.
What do the hell do they teach on that PPE course for anyone to blunder like Cameron has done on this issue.
God only knows. He seemed unable to understand the concept of aggregate demand, doesn't appreciate the important of historical English judicial norms and limits on the state, and continues to screw up the strategic political decisions. So he hasn't master any of the three letters.
I'm beginning to conclude that Oxford PPE actually has pretty appalling teaching: it's just great at being a networking club for the rich and connected.
Impact on the opinion polls to date of this: negligible. It may have more now that she's gone, particularly if it leads onto a dance of the seven veils.
It won't directly impact VI. What it does is add colour to base opinions that punters and party members have about Cameron. For a man who has never shaken off the accusations of being apart from normal people and normal Tories deciding to cling to Miller because her apology to the house was Ok and anyway I need a few tomen women in cabinet doesn't help him to shake this off.
For those formally of the Tory hinterlands who went purple it just reinforces their decision. For "real" Tories it reinforces their dislike of their leader as they head ibro Yerp elections they wI'll almost certainly have a bad result in.
For Cameron and those placemen around him, this must all be truly baffling. Cameron truly is the heir to Blair, uncomfortable in his own party, contemptuous of Parliament and so aloof that basic political instinct on such issues doesn't seem to work the way it does for anyone else.
Actually, I think Cameron is a fairly simple, decent person.
He took the view that Miller was found non guilty and therefore should not be punished.
He ignored the politics of course.
*However* my view is this was entirely Miller's fault. If she had made a gracious apology to the House she might have got away with it. Arrogance invites a fall
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
LOL not this old saw. He fancied the job and he went for it, getting the nod against all odds. Wipe the sleep from your eyes and come up with something nearer your usual high standards.
Indeed. There's a lot you can criticise about Ed Miliband, but this ridiculous idea that you should put your career on hold if your older brother cries dibs isn't one of them.
Impact on the opinion polls to date of this: negligible. It may have more now that she's gone, particularly if it leads onto a dance of the seven veils.
It won't directly impact VI. What it does is add colour to base opinions that punters and party members have about Cameron. For a man who has never shaken off the accusations of being apart from normal people and normal Tories deciding to cling to Miller because her apology to the house was Ok and anyway I need a few tomen women in cabinet doesn't help him to shake this off.
For those formally of the Tory hinterlands who went purple it just reinforces their decision. For "real" Tories it reinforces their dislike of their leader as they head ibro Yerp elections they wI'll almost certainly have a bad result in.
For Cameron and those placemen around him, this must all be truly baffling. Cameron truly is the heir to Blair, uncomfortable in his own party, contemptuous of Parliament and so aloof that basic political instinct on such issues doesn't seem to work the way it does for anyone else.
Actually, I think Cameron is a fairly simple, decent person.
He took the view that Miller was found non guilty and therefore should not be punished.
He ignored the politics of course.
*However* my view is this was entirely Miller's fault. If she had made a gracious apology to the House she might have got away with it. Arrogance invites a fall
If she'd done nothing wrong why was she asked, even by the utterly partial committee of MPs, to (a) pay back thousands of pounds and (b) apologise to the Commons?
Mr. Socrates, the argument is not you should just wave your brother through, it's that: 1) Ed Miliband talked his brother out of standing against Brown/leaving the Cabinet when Purnell did so that he [Ed] could take advantage of it later 2) He rang up the unions saying only Ed could stop his brother
Manipulating your brother to damage his career and help your own is not necessarily the most fraternal of attitudes.
"Actually, I think Cameron is a fairly simple, decent person.
He took the view that Miller was found non guilty and therefore should not be punished.
He ignored the politics of course"
The niavety in that post is amazing. You think Cameron didn't chop her because she was found not guilty and he is a decent fair person and there was no other reason why he or anyone in the cabinet didn't give her a nudge....Christ on a bike.
Wonder what would happen if another cabinet minister was found to have done more or less the same thing as Miller and it was revealed, lets just say just before the Euros ;-)
The front benches of all parties have MPs who have claimed the same or similar expenses to Maria Miller.
As good place to start, if you want to continue the witch hunt, would be Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper.
But there are plenty more.
It wasn't just the expenses though. It was her convenient lack of records and her refusal to co-operate with the inquiry.
I am not with you on that one, Socrates.
It reminds me of my pet hate. Policemen talking to camera after securing a conviction on a non-guilty plea and claiming the convicted "never showed any remorse".
A 'defendant' has a right to fight their case in accordance with the 'law' and the consequences of restricting such a right are far worse than tolerating its mild abuse.
I think Stodge has it right by pointing to lack of humility in her apology (even by comparison with Jack Dromey FFS!) and, generally, her poor handling of peer and public alike.
I haven't followed the Maria Miller story but from my limited perspective, I consider her performance in Parliament to have been her undoing as much as anything else.
Compounded by the second "apology" yesterday when she waffled about letting down her constituents but not getting the point that she needed to go.
It's like the worst days of John Major, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
She won't quit. I'm standing by her. Shes doing a good job. She won't quit. She's doing a good job. I'm standing by my Minister. She's doing a good job. She won't quit. I'm standing by her. She won't quit. She's doing a good job. Draw a line and move on. She won't quit....
There is one fact about Ed Miliband that everyone knows. I expect the Prime Minister will manage to mention it again today at some point in Prime Minister's Questions.
He's got a brother called David?
A brother called David who he stood against for the Labour party leadership.
Though for many Tories his ruthlessness contrasts favourably with Cameron?
On a day where David Cameron is going to be criticised for showing loyalty to a minister, an Opposition leader who "stabbed his brother in the back" is a gift from heaven for him.
LOL not this old saw. He fancied the job and he went for it, getting the nod against all odds. Wipe the sleep from your eyes and come up with something nearer your usual high standards.
Indeed. There's a lot you can criticise about Ed Miliband, but this ridiculous idea that you should put your career on hold if your older brother cries dibs isn't one of them.
It won't go unnoticed that Miller has resigned not because of any wrong doing, or that she feels that she has not reached the standard that we should expect from our politicians, but only because she has become a distraction.
As with so many of this things, I very much doubt Ed and David's travails have any salience with the public.
The only people it seems to bother are Tory PBers like Morris and Josias who express deep and heartfelt concern for David Miliband and the effect on Milibandian familial relations.
I can't tell you how surprised I am that you think that a part of Ed Miliband's back story that is unflattering to him lacks salience.
It's more or less the only thing the public know about him.
Salience doesn't mean "aware of". It means "care about".
'One silver lining for Cameron: At least PMQs won't now be dominated by terrible news that UK economic growth of 2.9% is fastest in the G7' @mattchorley
I'm sure Dave will find good cause to slip it in, Carola.
1) Ed Miliband talked his brother out of standing against Brown/leaving the Cabinet when Purnell did so that he [Ed] could take advantage of it later
What is your source for this? I don't see how it was in Ed's advantage. Surely he would have been better placed to stand against Brown after David was the assassin?
2) He rang up the unions saying only Ed could stop his brother
He was in a competitive contest with his brother. It's perfectly reasonable to ring up the main constituencies and tell them why they should back you over the others.
Mr. Fett, why don't you let me decide what my political position is?
I'd vote Lib Dem if it'd get rid of Balls. But it won't, so I won't.
I find it utterly bizarre that those who support a Tory government, want it to continue and are happy to vote for it are reluctant to declare themselves a supporter of it. No wonder the party has got toxicity issues.
The other thing about Basingstoke is that I am assuming that LAB have a half-decent GOTV operation in seats like this (evidence = over 10,000 votes last time), whereas I'm assuming that UKIP will have to largely ignore the vast majority of seats, including perhaps this one?
I'm a local (albeit in Sir George's seat - changed because couldn't stand Andrew Hunter). Ain't happening
Do you use the Bingo Hall in the new Leisure Park, Charles?
Farage off to Basingstoke this afternoon according to Wintour.
It's strange how those from a PR background in government seem to absolutely useless at it. I am sure if the gave Nigel a ring, he would give them some tips on it.
It's like the worst days of John Major, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
She won't quit. I'm standing by her. Shes doing a good job. She won't quit. She's doing a good job. I'm standing by my Minister. She's doing a good job. She won't quit. I'm standing by her. She won't quit. She's doing a good job. Draw a line and move on. She won't quit....
Bye Maria!
What saddens me is that I can't imagine it not happening in the next Parliament, either.
Mr. Socrates, he wasn't saying "support me because X, Y, Z" he was saying "ah, you hate my brother. Well, that's understandable... of course, if you really hate him and want him to lose, you should back me". It wasn't about policy or personality, it was a completely negative approach, reminiscent of the Tory-hating that the left like to indulge in.
We see it repeated all the time. E. Miliband's against this and that, and the other. What's he in favour of? Magic beans and money trees, more jobs for people, cheaper things for people, a combination of things so vague and positive nobody could disagree and specific policies that range from questionable to deranged, with an economic approach (to energy) so ridiculous it was out of date in the 4th century.
Perhaps it'll change in the coming months (post-referendum, either way) when we see Labour's policies unfurled for the election. I doubt it.
It's not ancient history for as long as Ed Miliband is leader. And while I agree with you that Ed Miliband did nothing wrong, that's not the public's view.
Citation needed (i.e. a poll) - you're always interesting, but I wonder how much you're in touch with most voters.
I meet hundreds of voters every week. A number are critical of Miliband, Cameron, Clegg and any other poltician you care to name, for all the familiar reasons. But nobody has ever mentioned Ed standing against his brother. I suspect people don't care one way or the other - they don't think it's treacherous, or brave, or anything except a mildly curious fact. Cameron can raise it if he wants to.
"Actually, I think Cameron is a fairly simple, decent person.
He took the view that Miller was found non guilty and therefore should not be punished.
He ignored the politics of course"
The niavety in that post is amazing. You think Cameron didn't chop her because she was found not guilty and he is a decent fair person and there was no other reason why he or anyone in the cabinet didn't give her a nudge....Christ on a bike.
Labour activists going for an 'innuendo about expenses' strategy now?
This should be fun to watch, since the chances of it backfiring spectacularly are high.
Mr. Socrates, he wasn't saying "support me because X, Y, Z" he was saying "ah, you hate my brother. Well, that's understandable... of course, if you really hate him and want him to lose, you should back me". It wasn't about policy or personality, it was a completely negative approach, reminiscent of the Tory-hating that the left like to indulge in.
We see it repeated all the time. E. Miliband's against this and that, and the other. What's he in favour of? Magic beans and money trees, more jobs for people, cheaper things for people, a combination of things so vague and positive nobody could disagree and specific policies that range from questionable to deranged, with an economic approach (to energy) so ridiculous it was out of date in the 4th century.
Perhaps it'll change in the coming months (post-referendum, either way) when we see Labour's policies unfurled for the election. I doubt it.
I must say that Labour’s “policy” announcements to date are what keep me from joining the LD to Lab switch!
Mr. Fett, the Conservatives are the least bad of three uninspiring options. Their desire for ever more surveillance and police powers is depressing (although I was delighted they axed Labour's Big Brother ID card insanity). Not enough has been done on energy, the greenism is madness, and Defence cuts (given it was the only department not force-fed money during Brown's binge) are not something I agree with.
I've voted for four parties. Presumably you think I'm a supporter of all four.
It's not ancient history for as long as Ed Miliband is leader. And while I agree with you that Ed Miliband did nothing wrong, that's not the public's view.
Citation needed (i.e. a poll) - you're always interesting, but I wonder how much you're in touch with most voters.
I meet hundreds of voters every week. A number are critical of Miliband, Cameron, Clegg and any other poltician you care to name, for all the familiar reasons. But nobody has ever mentioned Ed standing against his brother. I suspect people don't care one way or the other - they don't think it's treacherous, or brave, or anything except a mildly curious fact. Cameron can raise it if he wants to.
Quite. A reality check. The only people who "care" are rightwing Tories like Morris who have a strange fondness for David M's feelings. Odd that.
'One silver lining for Cameron: At least PMQs won't now be dominated by terrible news that UK economic growth of 2.9% is fastest in the G7' @mattchorley
I'm sure Dave will find good cause to slip it in, Carola.
Desperation isn't a manly way to woo, Ave.
Anyway, I'm off out. Sad to miss the fallout (if it gets a look in with the trial) and PMQs. I'll also need to catch up on this later...
"Actually, I think Cameron is a fairly simple, decent person.
He took the view that Miller was found non guilty and therefore should not be punished.
He ignored the politics of course"
The niavety in that post is amazing. You think Cameron didn't chop her because she was found not guilty and he is a decent fair person and there was no other reason why he or anyone in the cabinet didn't give her a nudge....Christ on a bike.
Labour activists going for an 'innuendo about expenses' strategy now?
This should be fun to watch, since the chances of it backfiring spectacularly are high.
It's all fun to watch, the last six days have been very entertaining.
Mr. Fett, why don't you let me decide what my political position is?
I'd vote Lib Dem if it'd get rid of Balls. But it won't, so I won't.
I find it utterly bizarre that those who support a Tory government, want it to continue and are happy to vote for it are reluctant to declare themselves a supporter of it. No wonder the party has got toxicity issues.
Imagine how bad it is for Clegg's amusing ostrich faction?
Mr. Socrates, he wasn't saying "support me because X, Y, Z" he was saying "ah, you hate my brother. Well, that's understandable... of course, if you really hate him and want him to lose, you should back me". It wasn't about policy or personality, it was a completely negative approach, reminiscent of the Tory-hating that the left like to indulge in.
We see it repeated all the time. E. Miliband's against this and that, and the other. What's he in favour of? Magic beans and money trees, more jobs for people, cheaper things for people, a combination of things so vague and positive nobody could disagree and specific policies that range from questionable to deranged, with an economic approach (to energy) so ridiculous it was out of date in the 4th century.
Perhaps it'll change in the coming months (post-referendum, either way) when we see Labour's policies unfurled for the election. I doubt it.
Please list three of Labour's policies which are deranged. Not in your opinion: in fact. And give evidence.
Comments
Does anyone know how it works? Will Sky have polled viewers to find out if they want to watch it, or is it just a call Sky make?
Cameron didn't principally show loyalty to a minister, he showed respect for due 'judicial' process.
As would (have) any PM: past, present or future.
The general feeling this morning will be that she has done the right thing, but has done it too late. Here too, Miller was not very quick to recognise that her departure had become inevitable. Nor was Downing Street very quick to concede this point. This dogged refusal to admit defeat inflamed the very hostility it was supposed to vanquish. But Miller’s vain resistance has at least demonstrated that David Cameron is disinclined to abandon a loyal minister until that course has become unavoidable.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2014/04/miller-was-right-to-resign.html
Ladbrokes: Next Culture Secretary betting.
6/4 Truss
2/1 McVey
6 Soubry
100 Dorries
More to follow.
I think Truss and McVey are the two to back.
Has its roots from the 90s when they covered the OJ Simpson trial.
Cameron should have sacked Miller for her contempt for parliament in her attempt to block the enquiry and subsequent tweet length apology.
He didn't recognise her contempt for parliament because his own contempt for parliament blinded him to it.
Now then, below I have been suggested as the left's version of AveryLP. Should I be proud of such a nomination......?
http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/British/Next-Culture-Secretary/Politics-N-1z131s4Z1z0qqbcZ1z141ne/
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/resignation-of-maria-miller-mp
Ed's going for the job, and the resultant long-standing feud with his brother, is mainly a familial tragedy. I don't criticise him much over it: there's plenty else to go on that is much more relevant to his ability to lead the country.
For instance, it's PMQ's today. Will Ed apologise to Mitchell? Of course not.
Yes but at least there's now some real betting on PB on her replacement with no repulsive bet welchers turning our stomachs with revolting and ghastly excuses.
Ladbrokes Politics @LadPolitics 5m
Ladbrokes: Next Culture Secretary betting.
6/4 Truss
2/1 McVey
6 Soubry
100 Dorries
More to follow.
LOL
Parliament has its own established procedure for investigating and ruling on complaints relating to expense claims. It is not a government responsibility.
Complaints are first investigated by an independent Commissioner, whose report is then considered by a cross-party HoC Standards Committee with three additional independents sitting.
This process has been followed and it has reached a ruling.
It is NOT for any Prime Minister to disregard, preempt or overrule Parliamentary authority.
Cameron's only option was to wait for Miller to resign.
As good place to start, if you want to continue the witch hunt, would be Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper.
But there are plenty more.
This is ironic. Maria Miller once signed a letter to Telegraph demanding public be allowed to recall misbehaving MPs: http://labourlist.org/2014/04/remember-when-maria-miller-called-for-recall-mechanism-for-mps-disciplined-by-the-commons-authorities/ …
David Cameron does not in any case need to say that he did anything wrong. Some sentence along the lines of "the front bench opposite already knows from the leadership election that he struggles with the concept of loyalty" will be quite enough to slide the stiletto between the ribs.
Mr. Easterross, I quite agree with your sentiment, but prefer to just boycott the channel (I usually watch it whilst having dinner) until they stop the saturation coverage. I also think it's unseemly to transform a case involving the killing of a woman and the murder trial of a man into some sort of spectator sport. It's precisely this sort of thing which makes me loathe to support cameras in courts. Last evening some Sky presenter or other (was channel-hopping and caught just this bit) was smiling and laughing at the end of the coverage. A woman died and a man's on trial for murder, it's not a laughing matter (reminds me of George Alagiah[sp] grinning when covering the 2007 floods in Yorkshire, which royally pissed me off).
On Miller: stayed long enough to do damage. Not clever. That said, the media seem to have done their utmost to damage someone pretty much cleared by the independent regulator.
Well that didn't work out well: Boris Johnson: Maria Miller is being hounded - Spectator Blogs - http://klou.tt/z423fgyuiiva
He has printing ink in his blood.
Well educated too.
No more girls.
They just roll over when pressure is applied.
Nimbus Fire @NIMBUS_Fire1 1h
Loved the comment after Nick Clegg said he supported Miller, comment was, 'the end is nigh'! Govt out of touch with public feeling.
Nothing new here, Jonathan.
I haven't followed the Maria Miller story but from my limited perspective, I consider her performance in Parliament to have been her undoing as much as anything else. The route to redemption lies through the twin villages of humiliation and contrition and by-passing these won't get you anywhere good.
In the expenses scandal, those who confessed and apologised did much better than those who tried to prevaricate and argue. The court of Parliament is, it seems to many, far more forgiving than the court of public opinion and although Miller's supporters rightly assert that she has done nothing wrong, that isn't really the point.
Timing is also everything and nothing as is media management. This story was allowed to gain traction and momentum in the latter part of last week and over the weekend. Again, there will be those who protest her innocence and salute David Cameron for loyally sticking by her but that's not the point either - she became a liability long before she recognised that and she has had to walk. As we have also seen, the wilderness, like the Championship, can be an easy place to get into but a hard one to leave.
The HoC committee makes judgements regarding a politician's fitness to be in the HoC not in the cabinet.
Its entirely Cameron's decision as to who is a member of his cabinet and to what standards cabinet ministers have to reach.
If he doesn't think they're morally or ethically deserving of a position then they go.
As with so many of this things, I very much doubt Ed and David's travails have any salience with the public.
The only people it seems to bother are Tory PBers like Morris and Josias who express deep and heartfelt concern for David Miliband and the effect on Milibandian familial relations.
Next to leave the Coalition Cabinet
Next to leave the Coalition Cabinet Pending £2.50
Boom !
*chortle*
Media and peer management was Maria's failure. Particularly surprising given her background was in PR.
If you dare.
Number 10 orders in JCB to make the hole it is in over all this rather larger.
I'd vote Lib Dem if it'd get rid of Balls. But it won't, so I won't.
Clegg? After the Euros?
It's more or less the only thing the public know about him.
I'm beginning to conclude that Oxford PPE actually has pretty appalling teaching: it's just great at being a networking club for the rich and connected.
He took the view that Miller was found non guilty and therefore should not be punished.
He ignored the politics of course.
*However* my view is this was entirely Miller's fault. If she had made a gracious apology to the House she might have got away with it. Arrogance invites a fall
This is what counts;
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26935148
However, that isn’t the case.
1) Ed Miliband talked his brother out of standing against Brown/leaving the Cabinet when Purnell did so that he [Ed] could take advantage of it later
2) He rang up the unions saying only Ed could stop his brother
Manipulating your brother to damage his career and help your own is not necessarily the most fraternal of attitudes.
He took the view that Miller was found non guilty and therefore should not be punished.
He ignored the politics of course"
The niavety in that post is amazing. You think Cameron didn't chop her because she was found not guilty and he is a decent fair person and there was no other reason why he or anyone in the cabinet didn't give her a nudge....Christ on a bike.
It reminds me of my pet hate. Policemen talking to camera after securing a conviction on a non-guilty plea and claiming the convicted "never showed any remorse".
A 'defendant' has a right to fight their case in accordance with the 'law' and the consequences of restricting such a right are far worse than tolerating its mild abuse.
I think Stodge has it right by pointing to lack of humility in her apology (even by comparison with Jack Dromey FFS!) and, generally, her poor handling of peer and public alike.
She won't quit. I'm standing by her. Shes doing a good job. She won't quit. She's doing a good job. I'm standing by my Minister. She's doing a good job. She won't quit. I'm standing by her. She won't quit. She's doing a good job. Draw a line and move on. She won't quit....
Bye Maria!
We see it repeated all the time. E. Miliband's against this and that, and the other. What's he in favour of? Magic beans and money trees, more jobs for people, cheaper things for people, a combination of things so vague and positive nobody could disagree and specific policies that range from questionable to deranged, with an economic approach (to energy) so ridiculous it was out of date in the 4th century.
Perhaps it'll change in the coming months (post-referendum, either way) when we see Labour's policies unfurled for the election. I doubt it.
I meet hundreds of voters every week. A number are critical of Miliband, Cameron, Clegg and any other poltician you care to name, for all the familiar reasons. But nobody has ever mentioned Ed standing against his brother. I suspect people don't care one way or the other - they don't think it's treacherous, or brave, or anything except a mildly curious fact. Cameron can raise it if he wants to.
This should be fun to watch, since the chances of it backfiring spectacularly are high.
I've voted for four parties. Presumably you think I'm a supporter of all four.
Anyway, I'm off out. Sad to miss the fallout (if it gets a look in with the trial) and PMQs. I'll also need to catch up on this later...
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=15294
Have a good time all.
Patrick Strudwick @PatrickStrud Apr 6
Nick Clegg, 2008: "If your MP lets you down, you should have the power to fire them." Nick Clegg, 2014: "Maria Miller has explained herself"
Jack Tunmore @JackTunmore Apr 6
Nick Clegg comes out in support of Maria Miller - now we know the end is near http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10746523/Nick-Clegg-Maria-Miller-has-explained-herself.html …
Alternatively, you could always abuse me.