Last week, Nadine posted on her blog saying that she had been completely cleared of any wrongdoing. Presumably, Hundal also received a letter from the PSC informing him of the decision. I have waited a few days to see if he might do us the honour of posting about it on Liberal Conspiracy, and maybe apologising to Nadine for the smear. But not a bit of it. He's remained silent on the matter. Just for the record, here's what the finding said...
The position is that no Parliamentary resources have been used to fund Mrs Dorries' weblog. Questions about whether its content is consistent with the rules in relation to Parliamentary funding do not therefore arise... No further action on any point is required, and therefore consider your complaint now closed.
The funny thing is that Nadine has accused Sunny of something far worse than what he accused her of. In her blogpost she accuses him of being a Liberal Democrat. Perhaps she should apologise to him too. Group hug, anyone?
What is he talking about ? The Liberal Party is paid for entirely by the tax payer .Its only what teachers do in the holidays.
Sunny is on holiday at the moment and so is finding it difficult to get to a computer. Interesting that Nadine's reaction was one of outrageous indignation, with a bit of sanctimonious preaching at the end:
"This whole matter has been a personal wake-up call for me.
There's the threat of international terrorism; a rudderless government in decline; huge economic uncertainty; the war in Afghanistan; a global energy crisis; the re-emergence of Russian aggression; and the spread of HIV in Africa.
But what about the complainant? Does the content of my blog really warrant such attention?"
How dare an MP be subjected to an investigation? Who does Sunny think she is? An ordinary person?
Funny about calling him a Lib Dem though. Heh.
"Sunny is on holiday at the moment and so is finding it difficult to get to a computer."
How very strange that he is blogging from the Labour conference on Liberal Conspiracy!
I like Pickled Politics blog and those that I've read convince me Sunny's contributions are worth reading. Not so impressed with Nadine Dorries. For a professional Christian politician she's not exactly Sarah Palin. Like jeans from down the market aren't Levis
His blog is like most left wing blogs, just plain downright nasty. Why is it they are all so personal? I think Nadine was quite right. A 21 page complaint indicates that there may be something slightly odd and obsessive about the person doing the complainig. She needs tough skin though. The pro-abortionists are zealots. Every time she lifts her head above the parapet, they will take aim.
Philipa, I don't think Nadine's ever claimed to be a christian (certainly not a hardcore talibangelical one). She got much of her anti-abortion info from a bunch of christian nutters, but was horrified by the thought that she might be identified with them.
Wwll, I think that he is giving pieces for other people to post (such as Sunder). Perhaps he hasn't received the letter (not being at home).
Actually Iain, it is probably better if you just discount everything I have said. Sorry.
A 21 page complaint indicates that there may be something slightly odd and obsessive about the person doing the complainig.
Nice one, good classic smear.
The complaint consisted of several things, including *gasps* examples, otherwise known as 'evidence'.
If a 21 page document consisting of several complaints and evidence makes someone obsessive and odd, the coppers must be made of some real weirdos. It's surprising they actually manage to leave the station, with all the hand washing and other rituals.
Three way group needed methinks.
Didn't someone classify Pickled Politics as Lib Dem in a certain 2007 Blogging Guide...
Banged to rights, Matt!
Where is Nadine's apology for her smear on Ben Goldacre?
"In her blogpost she accuses him of being a Liberal Democrat."
definition:; a person who can defeat Iain Dale in a General Election without even trying?
The Commissioner found that Dorries was in the wrong on several counts and got her to change her website: he records that she apologised for the errors.
So who owes who an apology?
Relevant elements of the letter from the Commissioner to the complainant are here:
"The rules of the house, however, do require Members to make a clear distinction between websites which are financed from public funds and any other domain. At the time of your complaint, Mrs Dorries’ website did not meet that requirement. Nor was it appropriate that she use the Portcullis emblem on the weblog given its contents. And the funding attribution on Mrs Dorries’ Home Page should have been updated to reflect that the funding came from the Communications Allowance and not from the Incidental Expenses Provision."
[ . . . ]
"I am, however, satisfied that Mrs Dorries has take effective action to rectify the situation, for which she has apologised…. She has expressed her regret for the confusion caused."
Anything to say, Iain?
Iain - you appear not to have responded to revelations that Nadine, in fact, did have to apologise to the commissioner, and that has made appropriate changes to her blog.
These facts have been confirmed by the commissioner's office.
There's more about how Sunny's complaint did actually force Dorries to make changes to her site and apologise to the commissioner for standards in this story from Bedford Today. It also points out that Dorries' own version of events is less than completely honest.
"Last week the Conservative MP for Mid Beds said she had been cleared by the Parliamentary commissioner for standards after a political campaigner alleged she had failed to make a clear distinction between her publicly-funded website and her personal 'blog'.
"But the Chronicle now understands that Ms Dorries was required to make changes to the site. A spokesman for the commissioner said: "This has been resolved through an informal resolution."
Post a Comment