Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Has Maria Miller Resigned Yet ?
Apparently even Tebbit has suggested that she resign. I realise that the whiff of brimstone doesn't have quite the effect it used to have, but I'm sure his opinion still has some weight attached to it. Never thought I would agree with the Chingford Skinhead but I can't quite see how dave is being helped in his task to get ahead of Labour in time for next years Election, until he lances this boil once and for all. I also understand, from what somebody was saying in the barbers this morning, that the DM have called for her to go.
Surely this can't go on ?
Surely this can't go on ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.@ Ladybirder Ermm, that's not quite what happened, nor exactly how it works, Ladybirder.
IPSA investigates claims of misuse of expenses and wrongdoing by MPs. They create a report based upon that investigation .That report is then passed to the a Commons Select Committee, in this case the Committee on Parliamentary Standards, a 13 strong cross-party committee which recently accepted lay ( or non MP) members. They will then discuss the recommendations within the report and either accept or amend accordingly. The lay members were introduced to the committee in recognition of the fact that the system was still MPs sitting in judgement on MPs, and this was their effort to dilute that, but the fact that those lay members did not get a vote undermined that. Those lay members can produce a dissenting "minority report" if they wish to.
But this system still means, essentially, that MPs are sitting in judgement of the actions of other MPs and is hence open to peer bias. I,along with many other people,thought that what we would be getting when IPSA was formed was a truly independent regulatory body. There is still a way to go before that happens, it would appear.
IPSA investigates claims of misuse of expenses and wrongdoing by MPs. They create a report based upon that investigation .That report is then passed to the a Commons Select Committee, in this case the Committee on Parliamentary Standards, a 13 strong cross-party committee which recently accepted lay ( or non MP) members. They will then discuss the recommendations within the report and either accept or amend accordingly. The lay members were introduced to the committee in recognition of the fact that the system was still MPs sitting in judgement on MPs, and this was their effort to dilute that, but the fact that those lay members did not get a vote undermined that. Those lay members can produce a dissenting "minority report" if they wish to.
But this system still means, essentially, that MPs are sitting in judgement of the actions of other MPs and is hence open to peer bias. I,along with many other people,thought that what we would be getting when IPSA was formed was a truly independent regulatory body. There is still a way to go before that happens, it would appear.
This woman has no excuse. If she continues to refuse to resign, she should be ejected. Cronyism is an unattractive, and frankly, a dishonest trait that rears its head in all walks of life, and certainly right across the political spectrum. Dave would be doing himself a favour in being seen to get rid of her.
Since the appalling expenses scandal first came to light under the last Labour government, I’ve never understood why, instead of making what they thought were the right noises, they didn’t sort the situation out once and for all. No private company would pay expenses without giving due consideration to the nature of the claim and without valid receipts being provided. Private enterprise accounts for every penny - and so it should be when the tax-payers’ money is being spent.
Since the appalling expenses scandal first came to light under the last Labour government, I’ve never understood why, instead of making what they thought were the right noises, they didn’t sort the situation out once and for all. No private company would pay expenses without giving due consideration to the nature of the claim and without valid receipts being provided. Private enterprise accounts for every penny - and so it should be when the tax-payers’ money is being spent.
No anne...its all to do with the fact that he has faffed around about this affair for days and even weeks, and he now doesn't want to be seen to be bowing down under pressure. I still maintain though, that a quick death now will be much better than letting this unlanced boil continue to grow and fester. We judge a man by his actions, or, in this case, his lack of actions.
Its like having an abscess....you know the tooth has to come out eventually and the longer you leave it, the more painful it gets.
The ball is in dave's court
Its like having an abscess....you know the tooth has to come out eventually and the longer you leave it, the more painful it gets.
The ball is in dave's court
I realise that you are tongue in cheek naomi. But I am a democrat at heart and while I would prefer to see dave make a continuing balls up of this affair, so that his chance of re-election is further damaged, this isn't a party political issue. The reputation of Parliament, not good at the best of times, is at risk here. dave is PM, as well as the leader of the Tory Party and I think he is being damaged buy not taking decisive action. If I was him and Tebbit was seen getting out of his coffin to join in the debate, I would be thinking that perhaps I should do something pretty quick. People will judge dave on this.
Have to go as my curry needs stirring.
Have to go as my curry needs stirring.
-- answer removed --
ladybirder, Miller did do something wrong: she overclaimed on her expenses. Since then there's been a disagreement over how much she should repay. She went with the lower figure - who wouldn't?
As you say, the committee needs replacing by an independent adjudicator (or maybe abolishing altogether, with the commissioner given the final say).
As you say, the committee needs replacing by an independent adjudicator (or maybe abolishing altogether, with the commissioner given the final say).
This may be of interest, Farriercm-
http:// www.tel egraph. co.uk/n ews/pol itics/l abour/1 0462871 /Its-no -coinci dence-t he-MPs- found-g uilty-o f-fiddl ing-are -all-La bour.ht ml
http://
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.