Bye, Bye Maria Miller; You Will Not Be Missed

Bye, bye Maria Miller; you will not be missed. 

It was obvious Maria Miller had to go in my mind when she gave the worst apology in the world and then got her PPS to threaten the press with Leveson. Putting aside any wrong doing she had done on her expenses, how can you honestly think that this is something a decent minister could do? It does astound me.

But actually I'm quite pleased Maria Miller has gone because I think she was the most incompetent person in the whole cabinet. She is quite frankly a walking disaster unable to handle any task.

Walking Disaster.

Maria Miller was in charge of the outcome of the Leveson inquiry. As you all know after the report was published Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg called for press censorship to solve crimes which were already illegal. The lobbying from a group of celebrities, who wanted to be on and off public display simultaneously, corrupted the weak minded lefties. So what was Maria Miller's reaction? Well after a short while the government, particularly the department she headed, caved in and agreed to press censorship. What an amazing Culture and Media Secretary she was. She will certainly not be known as the saviour of freedom in the future.

Maria Miller to be locked up for curbing freedom of speech.

Furthermore Maria Miller handled equal marriage. This was always going to be a hot potato in the Conservative Party, it was never going end very well. But Maria as the Equalities Minister handled it so badly for the Government. It got to the point that people who agreed with gay marriage felt they could not support the law because the media mismanagement was so enormous. The actual draft of the law was terrible too having being altered so many times and still not being great in its outcome.

Maria Miller is also not sorry for the mess she made of her time in Government.

Overall Maria Miller was just short of terrible (she is better than Harriet Harperson who is her opposite number, but that's not saying much). Thank God Sajid Javid and Nick Morgan are taking over her two briefs. Sajid Javid is a rising star, he is competent and can manage the monies very well. Nicky Morgan is as equally good. I have seen less of her in government but Nicky Morgan has shown competence throughout and is definitely not just got a Cabinet role because she is a woman. Its a shame that they have been elevated to an office under these circumstances.

The best of the 2010 intake.

Weekly Poll Lowdown

Welcome to the mad house, the majority of you are swivel eyed loons. 21 people voted a good healthy number, but we can do better chaps, we can do better.

Yes	62%
Yes, but not over Europe	0%
Yes, but not over Gay Marriage	14%
No	24%

I too am a swivel eyed loon and proud, ladies and gentlemen. I think we do need to tackle the EU problem in this country, even if that means twisting the arms of Dave in order to get a better deal for this country. A very, very reduced Europe is about the most tolerable for most people, 90% of Conservatives want a EU which is a Free Trade Agreement and that is it really. I think it's very rich for the leadership of the party to call us loons.

Swivel Eyed Dave.

Unlike the swivel eyed loons attributed in the No.10 comment I actually support gay marriage. I do think that the overall the 'modernisation' plan under Dave is a bit unnecessary. Labour was going around calling us the 'nasty party' a decade ago for talking about issues on immigration, benefits and criminal justice. Cameron wanted us to become like New Labour and take a softer more centrist response to these issues. But this is not really what the British people want at all. More people want a conservative stance on the above issues but voted Labour than centrists who didn't vote for us in 2010. Yet we are seemingly chasing a voter base that is so small it will make us lose in 2015.

Also has the modernisation programme, to change the Conservative Parties beliefs, actually worked. None of the Conservatives in the party are going around talking about the environment or how we need to have greater rehabilitation and more care for criminals. There is a big gulf from the vast majority of MPs beliefs, let along party members, and some of the people at the top. If there has been any 'modernisation' it has been economic as many members have been hoodwinked into continuing with the Gordon Brown consensus.

To end I would like to say that being a swivel eyed loon in the Conservatives is a badge that should been worn with pride.

Vote in the next poll.

Possibly the Worst MP in Parliament

I don't usually do this but today I'm going to give a biography on a certain lady called Sarah Teather, a Lib Dem MP. If you live in Brent Central I'm so sorry that you are arguably represented by probably the worst person in parliament. There are four good reasons why this is so.

Sarah Teather is possibly the worst MP in Parliament

Sarah Teather was sacked from her job as an education minister in the 2012 reshuffle. Why may you ask? Well its mostly because she refused 5 times to vote for the Government's welfare and education policies. It is beyond belief that she was allowed to do this even once, a Tory minister would have been sacked. Clearly she is not very loyal to her party or the Government. In my opinion you should be loyal to at least one of these if you want to remain a member of the coalition government.

Second, she is corrupt. She made sure that two schools in her constituency received special treatment when their planned extensions were to be stopped because of the closure of the building schools for the future scheme. She managed to make sure that these schools had money given to them still, something that goes against the idea of governing for the whole country that a minsters job entails.

Sarah is also a hypocrite. Remember the coalition proposals of equal marriage, on the 25th January Sarah said she was 'taking PRIDE in delivering equal marriage'. On the 5th February she voted against it. A complete change from a lady who doesn't do what she says. Oh yeah and like most Lib Dems she pledged to vote for no tuition fee rises but did so. What a terrific MP she is.

Yes she did Boy from Brent Central

Lastly, but most important in my mind, she is stupid. Yesterday she was on Question Time and she implied North Korea would decommission its nukes. Furthering that point she said "I fear it will end up in an arms race." Well my dear Sarah we've been in a nuclear arms race for over 60 years now, have you not noticed yet. This was shown in her time in government as well, whether you agree or not with the policy, she could not tell anyone why EMA should be scrapped. Instead she virtually said it shouldn't be, despite it being her job to implement the EMA reforms. Does that make sense? It did to Sarah Teather.

So Sarah please resign and give the people of Brent Central the relief of having another MP serve them. Even Lib Dem members grown at the sight of you in the media. Maybe you should get a new career in comedy. 

Weekly Poll Lowdown

The lobbies are closed. The votes are in. There were no abstentions. On the question of whether people are in favour of gay marriage the ayes have it, the ayes have it. The full results are below:

Yes	18 (81%)
No, favour civil partnerships	2 (9%)
No, favour no gay relationships	2 (9%)
Unsure	0 (0%)

I was expecting a result similar to this, it is very broadly representative of what the country thinks. Most polling data has between 55-70% of the public supporting gay marriage, depending on how the question is phrased. Obviously there were slightly more votes in favour of gay marriage in this poll due to most of readers of #thingselliottsays being young students. The % of people favouring no recognition of gay relationships is however very close to the actual view of the public.

I support Gay Marriage, however I personally don’t think you can be wrong on a matter of consciousness, which all human rights are (marriage being one of them). This is mostly because it’s not based on facts but personal emotions. However facts that are used against or for gay marriage may be contested as wrong; I have previously wrote about this http://thingselliottsays.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/why-i-hate-this-equal-marriage-debate.html .

I have included as a picture a map of the UK constituencies with the MPs voting record on gay marriage. Lillian Greenwood, the Labour MP for Nottingham South which contains UoN campus, did vote in favour of this bill. However my home MP Steve Barclay of North East Cambridgeshire abstained because he was on paternity leave (cleverly arranged most likely). For all those Nottingham Students who live in Beeston or are mad enough to walk several miles and live in Trent Bridge, Anna Soubry MP and Ken Clarke MP both voted in favour of the Bill.

(keen students of counting will notice this polling info doesn't add to 100%, there has been some electronic rounding). Please vote in the next poll.

Why I Hate This Equal Marriage Debate

I support Equal Marriage, I just do. Like everyone who doesn't or does agree with me they feel strongly that what they think is right. It’s a matter of consciousness and a human right. There is no right answer and the only person who can answer the question is yourself. There are some very good reasons not to back gay marriage: you could not support marriage at all, you may be very traditional or deeply religious. However, and quite obviously if you read the previous lines, I don’t personally buy any of these.

What I can’t stand is the debate over this issue. A minority, but a sizeable one, on both sides are attacking each other in a way that is upsetting people and in some casing making lies. I'm going to give a brief synopsis on both sides and why this debate, not the idea or Bill itself, is just so bad.

Some in the campaign against gay marriage have been quite impolite to say the least and very hurtful. Cardinal O’Brien of Scotland likened gay marriage to ‘slavery’ and said that it was ‘grotesque’. Clearly this is rabble rousing rhetoric from the cardinal to try show how wrong  he believes equal marriage is. Cardinal O’Brien clearly, and rightly, has very religious reasons not to back gay marriage and that’s fine. But what is very rude is to use rhetoric like this on an issue and in a way that upsets many people. Even the Bible doesn't use words like this when describing gay people and I think it’s quite insensitive to use them.

There have also been lies spread about how gay marriage will impact on the Church, forcing them to carry out gay marriages. The case of Gas and Dobouis v France was highlighted as a case from the ECHR by the Telegraph to show that equal marriage would be forced on religious institutions. However, this legal case doesn't deal with gay marriage but legal rights of adoption in civil partnerships. The case actually resulted in France winning as the court held the right of the autonomy of France to decide on what extent it allows gay adoption. The Telegraph has every personal right to disagree with gay marriage but it shouldn't seek to lie in order to make people vote against gay marriage on the grounds of religious protection.

I’d like to also cite the problems with the pro gay marriage campaign too. It is wrong on a matter of consciousness to demean other people’s personal views on an issue so sensitive. This is what Ben Howlett had to say to Steve Baker MP when he disagreed with gay marriage:

What an utterly stupid and hurtful comment to make. Steve Baker has every right to disagree, especially considering how pro-liberty he is. Steve Baker has quite clearly outlined religious objections on the grounds that there needs to be greater acceptance in the Church of England. I don’t agree with Steve Baker, I think the Church of England has been given sufficient safeguards, but this gives Ben Howlett no right to say stupid things about votes for women. 

We can’t treat people who disagree with gay marriage as harking back to a Victorian past. My advice is don't demean anyone who opposes gay marriage as some mad fool. Nor can we treat people who disagree with gay marriage as bigots as many who support gay marriage have done. This is putting your system of values on to someone else, more dictatorship than liberalism I think. Unlike Gordon Brown, I can’t actually think of a situation when someone can be at all bigoted on a matter of consciousness.

So there you have it. A brief synopsis on both sides of why this debate has plunged into distaste and is quite frankly repulsive. I support the Bill and equal marriage but my advice to any passing MP who should read this blog, if I’m lucky enough to have an MP read it at all, is to vote with your heart not on silly arguments or fear of being called a bigot.

Gay Marriage saving the economy

A lot of Conservative MPs have recently been saying that the government should focus on legislation for the economy instead of gay marriage. Have they gone mad!

This isn’t really a point of whether you agree with equal marriage or not, but why would you, especially if you’re a Tory MP, want the government to pass more laws on the economy. The Government isn’t going to solve this crisis by another act of parliament, it’s going to solve it by cutting spend and decreasing taxes in the Budget.

Its business (big but mostly small) that’s going to grow the economy. When Parliament debates the economy it means more public spending, it means more wasted tax payer money on projects like HS2. It also means more time for the Lib Dems and Labour to make amendments to Bills that would mean more borrowing.

Parliament needs to pass Acts that reduce welfare spending, gives permission to get fracking going and improve education. Not fool the public into thinking the economy will be solved because MPs are doing something about it, because government is virtually never the answer.

I’m very surprised that any Conservative MP is asking for the expansion of government in the economy, especially as the people doing so are the more right wing elements. At first sound of it the public will agree with them but I think it should be said loud and clear that replacing the Bill for equal marriage with a Bill to solve the economy will help only to make it worse. If anything the gay marriage Bill is a boost to the economy because the government isn't messing around with people’s lives and money. 

Breaking News from the Attorney General

Yesterday the Attorney General came to Nottingham University. He gave a speech on his role and what the big issues of the time were. He also answered several questions at the end of this. Mr Grieve said he would be fully open and answer any searching questions and he did. #thingselliottsays can reveal two new stories about Dominic Grieve on how he is going to vote on the prisoners voting bill (although his stance has been inferred before in the Independent) and which way he will vote in the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill. The Attorney General has obviously had a lot to do with these topics as they are big legal issues.

Mr Grieve was very clear that the UK should stick to its treaty obligation and introduce votes for prisoners, but this should be to a minimal in his position as he does not agree with prisoners having the right to vote. He then went on to say that he will be voting for prisoners to have this right if they are locked up for 6 months or less if the proposed bill after scrutiny is not re-drafted. Mr Grieve said that ‘the ECHR is a treaty and it binds us so we must observe what the court says. We have in Britain a tradition of observing our treaties and by not doing so would cause international damage to our reputation. Other countries will think what rules will we break next’. The Attorney General believes that ‘this is such a small issue and would jeopardise our international standing. We should pull out of the treaty if we strongly wish to make it an issue but no one is suggesting that’.  He then followed this by stating that we don’t have a blanket ban on prisoners voting as those on remand, not sentenced and those guilty of contempt of court can vote.

The Attorney General also revealed he would abstain in the vote in the new proposed Marriage Equality Bill. Dominic Grieve wished to call gay marriage civil union rather than civil marriage to try placate those who take issue with the Bill. Mr Grieve from the talk that he gave seems very involved with his constituency despite being hectically working in his non-cabinet but attending cabinet role. It may be that he is very aware of disquiet amongst all local associations and thus this is why he has chosen to not vote. More specifically Dominic Grieve will be voting for the Bill at its first stage  but will not be doing so at the 2^nd stage

Overall Dominic Grieve gave an excellent talk and even staying around to speak to us personally about anything. I personally find him open and not at all smarmy. And would like to thank him for his speech.