Maria Miller

The Antikythera Mechanism · Apr 9, 2014

Look, I know that you're all as honest as the day is long, but before we all get too high and mighty, is there anyone on here who hasn't FIDDLED their expenses a little bit at some point in the past? I know its all about being in public office and the amount dishonestly claimed but would be interesting to have some feedback. To answer the question, no, how can it be possible to trust any government that contains solicitors and barristers? It's part of their job to LIE and get away with it.

glasfryn · Apr 9, 2014

Nibble said:
No we cannot. Miller should have NEVER been allowed to resign. She should have been sacked, made to give a genuine public apology, not read from a card, NO PENSION, AND prosecuted for fraud. This is no anti Tory rant, although Cameron is governing an Austerity Britain so he should have made a far more extreme example of her but Labour let dozens of the crooks off with fraud.

think everyone on here knows my opinion about TRUST
it does look like they are all crooks and the few that have been calling for her resignation are frightened they might lose their very own gravy train

Nibble · Apr 9, 2014

The Antikythera Mechanism said:
Look, I know that you're all as honest as the day is long, but before we all get too high and mighty, is there anyone on here who hasn't FIDDLED their expenses a little bit at some point in the past? I know its all about being in public office and the amount dishonestly claimed but would be interesting to have some feedback. To answer the question, no, how can it be possible to trust any government that contains solicitors and barristers? It's part of their job to LIE and get away with it.

Actually, no I don't fiddle my expenses thank you. I happen to think that if someone has trusted me to spend their money then I will do so responsibly. I expect the same in return and this leads to a healthy working environment and repeat work. If I stole, STOLE, £50,000 from the public and my employer I would expect be dismissed and disgraced immediately.

fat old seagull · Apr 9, 2014

glasfryn said:
thief is a thief
whatever way you dress it up

And here is the proof....
View attachment 52644 =View attachment 52645

spring hall convert · Apr 9, 2014

Cameron's such a man of the people isn't he.

In his opinion she didn't do enough to be sacked or offer her resignation. The proles then start getting a bit restless and all of a sudden she resigns.

Jellyfish. She should have been out of the cabinet as soon as her obstruction to comission became public knowledge but DC wasn't really all that bothered by it.

Westdene Seagull · Apr 9, 2014

fat old seagull said:
Yes I'd do that too, except it wouldn't give them a rise. I think they need to be paid in line with their attendances at Westminster and their administrative pay need be based on those attendances pro-rata.

I'm not wishing to stand up for politicians here but basing pay on attendance at Westminster neglects the important work some MPs do as Ministers or government officials ( visit businesses, other countries etc ) and the vital community connection via their surgeries. While I want my MP to be present at Westminster I also want face to face access to him / her in my local area.

Dorset Seagull · Apr 9, 2014

fat old seagull said:
Yes I'd do that too, except it wouldn't give them a rise. I think they need to be paid in line with their attendances at Westminster and their administrative pay need be based on those attendances pro-rata.

This is a difficult one as we would ideally like our politicians to be of sharp mind and previously top of their chosen profession in order to make the sort of decisions that would benefit this country. Captains of industry don't come cheap so what we end up with is career politicians who generally really don't have a scooby about the real world and don't come up with any innovative solutions to the nations problems.......what's that about peanuts and monkeys?

glasfryn · Apr 9, 2014

fat old seagull said:
And here is the proof....
View attachment 52644 =View attachment 52645

can't open either of them

glasfryn · Apr 9, 2014

I am sure if a single mum who was on benefit and through no fault of her own overpaid by a trivial amount she would be chased to the end of the earth
Miller is a thief and that is/was my money
someone shout for a policeman

drew · Apr 9, 2014

I wouldn't pay them any more and the rules on expenses relating to property should be far more stringent. Firstly, you only get assistance is your constituency home is outside safe commuting distance. You only get assistance relating to the property in London and the property should only be for yourself comprising of one, maybe two, bedroomed flat. Any assistance giving by the public purse should then be refunded when the property is sold after deduction of any relevant CGT. You only have the property in London to facilitate your attendance at parliament so when you lose your seat you shouldn't profit from that property unless the public purse has been fully refunded. I'm not advocating they should be out of pocket but they certainly shouldn't profit from it!

beorhthelm · Apr 9, 2014

the main problem with this is it leads to headlines and attitudes like the title. its not the government, its parliament. apart from a bit of PMQ point scoring, Miliband has been very quiet and MPs from Labour and Liberals have quietly backed Miller, because they see it as an attack on the system.

Frampler · Apr 9, 2014

Good riddance. Her behaviour in claiming these expenses wasn't exceptional in the last Parliament, but it was greedy and dishonest. Taking out an additional mortgage on a property and charging the taxpayer for the increased interest payments is so obviously wrong, but politicians are unwilling or unable to see this. The threats her advisers made to newspapers, and the tone of her correspondence with the investigator, reveal a staggering lack of intelligence and I'm sure the Arts Council will be glad it no longer has to work with this dullard.

Geriatric Seagull · Apr 9, 2014

They all use/abuse their expenses system to the absolute limit of what they can get away with. What else should we expect from a bunch of largely privately educated cronies, many of whom treat their parliamentary "job" as a part-time addition to their other sources of income? And to think that we, the Plebs, have the temerity to criticise them!

spring hall convert · Apr 9, 2014

red star portslade said:
A democracy is bollocks.
At least in north korea you're just given a ****. We have to choose one.

Haircut?

piersa · Apr 9, 2014

It really is a sad indictment that she stole £5000 and Cameron expected everyone to accept an apology and then move along like nothing happened. Depressing dishonesty from the people we trust to run the country.

red star portslade · Apr 9, 2014

piersa said:
It really is a sad indictment that she stole £5000 and Cameron expected everyone to accept an apology and then move along like nothing happened. Depressing dishonesty from the people we trust to run the country.

This fiddling bitch, along with Hazel Blears and dozens of others should be slopping out in the nick for 10 years.
Only then will I accept the 'Drawing a line under,' or 'Moving on' that the **** Cameron patronisingly spouts each time robbing shits like these are outed.

Kumquat · Apr 9, 2014

I think we all know what is really going on here deep down. Remember when Cameron came out and said that expense fiddling would not be tolerated and all those who did would have no excuses? So why now on one individual case does he feel that she deserves the chance "to clear her name?" She has something on him. We may or may not find out what, but it's blindingly obvious that she has something on him.

Nitram · Apr 9, 2014

Kumquat said:
I think we all know what is really going on here deep down. Remember when Cameron came out and said that expense fiddling would not be tolerated and all those who did would have no excuses? So why now on one individual case does he feel that she deserves the chance "to clear her name?" She has something on him. We may or may not find out what, but it's blindingly obvious that she has something on him.

I think it's more likely that he did not want to sack one of the few women he had in his cabinet, and thought she could ride out this matter. He did not want to be pushed into a situation where he was being told what to do and wanted to appear in control. Not for the first time he has misjudged the mood of the public and his own party. Nothing more than arrogance has led to this on her part by being pedantic and arguing every inch of the way, and him in misjudging the situation. Although it would be hilarious if this was a Major/Currie event.

Westdene Wonder · Apr 9, 2014

Glad that she has gone but I feel she was advised to resign as Cameron did not want to loose face by sacking her

Cheshire Cat · Apr 9, 2014

Burn the witch !!!

BURN THE WITCH !!!

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Maria Miller

The oldest known computer

cleaning up cat sick

New member

New member

Well-known member

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch

Once Dolphin, Now Seagull

cleaning up cat sick

cleaning up cat sick

Drew

A. Virgo, Football Genius

New member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

The most curious thing..

Share this page