News0 min ago
Return of the Poison Dwarf ?
The Guardian Greenslade blog today says
"Why has the BBC given Hazel Blears a place on Andrew Neil's sofa? What do the producers of Andrew Neil's BBC TV programme, This Week, think they are doing by replacing Diane Abbott with Hazel Blears?
I can just about understand why they had to give Abbott the heave, though there's precious little chance of her appearances affecting her support (or lack of it) by Labour MPs as she seeks the leadership.
But why choose "homes flipper" Blears of all people to cuddle up to Michael Portillo on the This Week sofa? May I remind the BBC of the Daily Telegraph revelation of a year ago that she claimed for three properties at the taxpayers' expense.
It was further revealed that she had not paid capital gains tax on the profit from the sale of a London flat.
She then repaid the £13,332 capital gains tax, but only after being ordered to do so by Gordon Brown.
I accept that she was re-elected by the voters of Salford, but she is tainted by the expenses scandal and no This Week viewer is going treat anything she says with any credence."
Anyone feel the same and any further thoughts on Ms Blears resurrection ?
"Why has the BBC given Hazel Blears a place on Andrew Neil's sofa? What do the producers of Andrew Neil's BBC TV programme, This Week, think they are doing by replacing Diane Abbott with Hazel Blears?
I can just about understand why they had to give Abbott the heave, though there's precious little chance of her appearances affecting her support (or lack of it) by Labour MPs as she seeks the leadership.
But why choose "homes flipper" Blears of all people to cuddle up to Michael Portillo on the This Week sofa? May I remind the BBC of the Daily Telegraph revelation of a year ago that she claimed for three properties at the taxpayers' expense.
It was further revealed that she had not paid capital gains tax on the profit from the sale of a London flat.
She then repaid the £13,332 capital gains tax, but only after being ordered to do so by Gordon Brown.
I accept that she was re-elected by the voters of Salford, but she is tainted by the expenses scandal and no This Week viewer is going treat anything she says with any credence."
Anyone feel the same and any further thoughts on Ms Blears resurrection ?
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by olddutch. 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.
-- answer removed --
your powers of speech seem to be functioning fine. This is a TV programme, not a roll-call of sainthood. I'd never have expected King and Portillo to have displayed chemistry but they did. They presumably think the same about Blears. Maybe they'll be wrong, and if so they'll probably replace her. But she's worth a try.
Hazel has done a lot of good work in Salford that is why people voted for her.
Hazel Blears defied a legion of critics to win re-election as MP in Salford.
A vast press posse had gathered to watch the downfall of a former cabinet minister – but they don't know Salford – stained red.
When she was elected as Salford MP 13 years ago a staggering 22,848 people voted for her. Last night her support had fallen to less than 17,000 but it was still enough to win the newly formed seat of Salford and Eccles.
Hazel Blears defied a legion of critics to win re-election as MP in Salford.
A vast press posse had gathered to watch the downfall of a former cabinet minister – but they don't know Salford – stained red.
When she was elected as Salford MP 13 years ago a staggering 22,848 people voted for her. Last night her support had fallen to less than 17,000 but it was still enough to win the newly formed seat of Salford and Eccles.
"she claimed for three properties at the taxpayers' expense.
It was further revealed that she had not paid capital gains tax on the profit from the sale of a London flat.
She then repaid the £13,332 capital gains tax, but only after being ordered to do so by Gordon Brown."
KaptKopter - Im still surprised that after her secret greedy immoral opportunism was revealed that 1) she didnt stand down, 2) she wasnt made to stand down and 3) that labour voters could still vote her back in - notwithstanding her previous track record ?
It was further revealed that she had not paid capital gains tax on the profit from the sale of a London flat.
She then repaid the £13,332 capital gains tax, but only after being ordered to do so by Gordon Brown."
KaptKopter - Im still surprised that after her secret greedy immoral opportunism was revealed that 1) she didnt stand down, 2) she wasnt made to stand down and 3) that labour voters could still vote her back in - notwithstanding her previous track record ?
olddutch, it's widely assumed that people vote for the party of their preference. But it's often the case that they vote for the person rather than the party. They did that in my constituency (which should have been Labour but wasn't), and it seems they did it in Salford too. This is entirely fair, I think, because it's actually the way the voting system is structured: you vote for a local representative.
incidentally, when I said King in a previous post it was because I'd just been reading about Oona King running for London mayor and - doubtless because, in AOG fashion, they are both black (and also because they're both New Labour apparatchiks) - I got confused. I meant Diane Abbott. But I'm sticking with the comments: as with the peerages, they're not a mark of merit but a sign of what someone hopes they will be able to do in future.
Obviously the voters of Salford, for whatever reason, did re-elect Blears and chose to overlook her contempt for the tax payer by her immoral picking of the public purse. She personally also chose to disregard her own immoral behaviour by not standing down - as did her local Labour Party by allowing her to stand again.
Whatever good work Blears may have done, she still got away with immoral behaviour that should have seen her leave or removed from Parliament. She no longer has any moral credibility after ripping the taxpayer off - whether or not she was inside the then existent dubious rules.
Whatever good work Blears may have done, she still got away with immoral behaviour that should have seen her leave or removed from Parliament. She no longer has any moral credibility after ripping the taxpayer off - whether or not she was inside the then existent dubious rules.
1 to 11 of 11
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.