The Prime Minister has said that he did not know that Nadine Dorries would be on I'm A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here. Dorries has responded by making the counter-claim that she had informed the whip's office that she would be away for a month. Now, these two claims address different issues: one is about the Prime Minister having knowledge of Dorries making an appearance on a television show; the other is about the chief whip's office having knowledge of Dorries taking a month off (and giving permission for this). As it stands, one, both, or neither could be true. The counter-claim from Dorries (which has been responded to by the whip's office) does not address the specific claim made by David Cameron. The responses to the claim that Dorries informed the whip she was taking a month off do not address the time off, but refer back to the Prime Minister's claim that he was in the dark about Dorries appearing on I'm A Celebrity.
Here is a video of an appearance Nadine Dorries' daughters made on TV: Daybreak
At the start of the interview, it is claimed that Dorries asked for time off. "Obviously, she, she did ask for the month off. She did. She requested it from, um, the chief whip at the time, that she was going to go away for a month, it would be controversial. He said it's fine, you know, and that happened so that was OK."
HuffPo wrote that "She did not say if the whip's office was aware
that her 55-year-old
mother would be flying off to the Australian jungle to take part in the
reality TV show." So journalists are at least pointing out that the claim is only that the
time off was allowed, not that the appearance in I'm a Celebrity was. But they don't seem to have managed to clarify what has actually happened.
Then there's the whip's office quote that is being presented as a contradictory response to the comments from the Dorries camp: the chief whip "was neither asked nor did he agree to Nadine Dorries going off to
Australia for a month to take part in I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of
Here". This is a specific denial that does not address the actual claim made by Dorries' daughter.
In spite of the articles about this from broadcasters, blogs and newspapers, we still don't know what Dorries asked for (if anything) or what the chief whip agreed to (if anything).
If I were interviewing Nadine Dorries or her daughters I think I would ask what permission was actually requested from the chief whip. And I would be interested to see the response of the chief whip's office to the question "what did Andrew Mitchell agree to?"
If we are charitable and assume that Cameron, Dorries and Mitchell are all telling the truth then it seems that what actually happened was that (a) Dorries asked for and received permission to take a month off, without saying what it was for and (b) Dorries was not given permission to appear on I'm A Celebrity, because she didn't ask for it. Presumably, Dorries was suspended not for taking a month off but for going off to Australia to take part in a TV show.
I'm a bit bemused to be in a situation where I'm left to guess what happened despite wide coverage of the situation, because each of the two sides insists on making specific claims and denials that do not address the point the other side is making, and no-one appears willing or able to call them on it.
Nadine Dorries, Conservative MP for Mid Bedfordshire, is unfit for office and unworthy of trust.
Nov 21, 2012
Nov 6, 2012
Nadine Dorries to appear on I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here
Once again, I must beg your patience on a long-overdue update regarding what Nadine Dorries has been up to behind the scenes, but in the short term I bring news that Dorries is to enter the Australian jungle as a contestant on 'I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here'.
For reasons too obvious/numerous to mention, there needs to be a place for people to learn the truth about Nadine Dorries, and this is an ideal platform (that she has repeatedly attempted to remove from service) but we will need more writers/editors if we are to hope to keep up with what is to come.
So I am holding open auditions for more writers/editors for this micro-site from today. If you wish to write for this blog about Nadine Dorries' antics in the jungle (and maybe further on if you so desire), simply write a new article about anything she has done recently (or ever, if you have a favourite), then publish it on your site/blog, and submit a link to me via this page at my main website. If you have not been managing your own website, do feel free to submit your article as text, but don't be offended if you are considered for a writing role and not an editing role (experience is a requirement on the latter).
Please be yourself, but do be aware that Dorries makes false and damaging accusations against effective critics (sometimes to police), so you would be well advised to moderate your tone and stick to evidence a lot more than you would otherwise.
On that note, it should probably be made very clear to you that Nadine Dorries reserves special attention for people who publish things she does not approve of; should you attempt to take this woman on at all, I shit you not when I say you risk making an enemy for life. This is the main reason she has survived for so long despite being the most audacious liar in the House today; she can be so unhinged and vindictive at times that even the Speaker is afraid of her.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)