I'm sure I don't have to go into the details of the whole expenses case about my MP. It has been widely reported. Interestingly though, the document that seems to "Exonerate" her, actually does far from it. For starters, we have the sickening admission that 70% of her blog is fiction....yes...she admits it. She has since backtracked and said she meant 30%, but that is supposed to be seen as a good thing. So lets get this into context. She says that she is doing this because if she blogs the truth that one of her stalkers will find out her whereabouts. She also says that she doesn't want the electorate to feel let down. Surely on both counts there are some questions that need answering? Who are these stalkers? Well we know that one of them is Tim Ireland, and again, if you look at his blog , you can see quite how far wide of the mark she is in this assertion...but the more she says it, the more it seems to be accepted. So Mrs Dorries, it is time to either give evidence, or shut up. Secondly, she admits to lying so as not to give her constituents the idea that she doesn't care about them. We didn't need you to lie Mrs Dorries, the contempt that you show through this disgraceful admission is evidence enough.
She was found not guilty of a breach of thr rules with regard to second homes, but this is based largely on her word. She keeps no records of her attendance, no records of her stays in the constituency, but the report has taken her on her word. This is despite the fact that one of her neighbours stated that she was in the constituency for 80% of the time. His evidence appears to have been dismissed as it could bee unreliable! This is astonishing! The report cites Dorries blog as part of the evidence, but also publishes her quote about the 70% fiction! Are they sure that "Neighbour No.1" is the unreliable one here?
Even if we accept that what she has said is true, we have an MP who by her own admission lied to her constituents to curry favour, does not treat her constituency as her home, and would appear to be in the Cotswolds for 80% of the time. How can she be a representative for us? We have an MP who expects to keep no accurate record for the purposes of some pretty substantial expense claims, but expects us to take her on her word. If she was in Industry, the financial department would throw the expense claim back in her face.
The report paints a picture of a woman with a regrettable tone, a devious, truculent approach to the collection of evidence, and someone who appears to have wilfully wasted the time of government in the pursuit of her evidence. She posted a picture on her blog some time ago, which showed the Parliamentary standards guide that had apparently blown out of the window of her office....I will assume that this forms part of the 70%, as the document is quite sizeable. I would not expect Dorries to have any interest in a document that encourages "Standards".
A large proportion of her time has been spent lashing out at those who dare to question her. She gives the impression of a woman who believes she has a right to power, rather than treating it as a privilege. She lashes out at her constituents, ignores the majority of them, and I can only assume that the 30% truth figure relates to the comments section of her blog that has long since closed down.
She has returned to Twitter, and of course gone through and blocked large numbers of her constituents. She refers to people who question her as "Nutters"....yes..."Nutters"....She has a position on the Health select committee for crying out loud, and is paid extra to be part of it! If she turns up to this committee, I truly hope she does not encourage use of phrases like "Nutter".
She has spent the last week hollering from the rooftops about the BBC, and it's disgraceful bias towards the Labour Party, and then goes on to appear on BBC Radio to use it as a medium to proclaim her "Innocence".
She was NOT exonerated yesterday, she was shown up to be a careerist serial manipulator, and a self proclaimed liar. This was not a throwaway comment on a blog. He admission came in a government document, that she had the time and chance to request amendments to, she did not ask for that to be changed, so she accepted this admission as the truth. The commission found her to be guilty of the "Non Serious" offence of failing to advise of an address change. It also found her to be extremely unhelpful. She came out of this report worse than if she had been found guilty of the Expense issue. There are some good things to come out of this. The BNP who raised the initial complaint did not succeed. I would hate for the BNP to succeed at anything. Mainly though, it has gained national attention. The media are beginning to pick up on this gaffe prone woman, who is the latest on a long line of female Prince Philip impersonators in the Conservative Party. I want her to be in the National Conscience. I want the rabid Blue rinse brigade to be disgusted at her, I want the very media that she has spent the last few years manipulating to turn it back on her, just so she can taste what she has encouraged in others.
Mrs Dorries, you are a disgrace, you are not fit for Public Office, and you are a cheap, nasty self proclaimed liar.
is a waste of time, and you have criticsed those that use it heavily. This is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion, however, I am sure you will acknowledge that you used it to great effect during the election campaign to smear your opponents. I was wondering when it became a waste of time to use it? Was it at the exact moment you got elected?
