Why is Nadine Dorries so belligerent?

While I’m generally supportive of the coalition government’s attempts to fix the problems that 13yrs of Labour mismanagement have left us, let me make it clear – I am a Liberal Democrat. There are many Conservative activists, councillors and MPs I can converse with (even if I don’t necessarily agree with their politics), Nadine Dorries is certainly not one of them!

Nadine Dorries has been in the news again this week. On Friday Lucy Glennon wrote in The Guardian that the Tory Bedfordshire MP had blogged about one of her disabled constituents’ frequent tweeting. Dorries assumed that someone who could tweet so much was obviously not disabled enough to be claiming benefits and suggested the person in question should get a job, or she would “inform the authorities”.

While that was a terrible generalisation from Dorries (and without foundation I might add), perhaps her far worse accusation that the constituent continued to “…work for the Labour party and write porn at the same time as claiming your disability benefit”  I would think be worthy of complaint and, if it was me, would certainly see libel proceedings begin forthwith.

So then why did Tory Nadine Dorries pick on this unsuspecting constituent? Was this a personal vendetta or a response to an attack from the disabled constituent? It would appear not. It seems apparant that Nadine Dorries has a hatred for disabled people (certainly a misunderstanding of the limitations some disabled people have), but far more concerning is the fact that Dorries thinks disabled people can’t have a social life or political views. Dorries belives that the disabled can’t partake in any physical activities at all (otherwise she believes they aren’t truly disabled). How short sighted for anyone in Britain today, never mind an MP.

So, why is Nadine Dorries so belligerant?

One only has to look at her Wikipedia entry for answers. She has made it her business to “attack” people, either for no good reason or perhaps because it’ll look good as a “campaign” on her next constituency communication.

Dorries served as a member of the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee. During her time on this committee, she only attended 2% of sessions. Refusing to sit on the committee due to the manner in which the committee was chaired claiming that the Chairman, Lib Dem Phil Wiullis was acting as a puppet for another Lib Dem committee member, Dr Evan Harris. The committee then reformed as the Science and Technology Select Committee, she did not attend a single session in protest.

When accused by the Daily Telegraph in 2009 that she claimed £24,222 Additional Costs Allowance (for ‘secondary’ housing costs), Dorries counter-attacked on her blog, alleging lack of good faith on the part of the paper. On 22 May she went on BBC Radio 4 to draw parallels between the McCarthy ‘Witch-Hunts’ and the press’ revelation of MP’s expenses. She claimed everyone was fearing a ‘suicide’, and colleagues were constantly checking up on each other. Later in the day her blog was taken down. It transpired that Withers, lawyers acting for the Barclay Brothers, the owners of the Daily Telegraph, had required the removal of the blog, on threat of libel action against the service provider.

From her ridiculous campaign against a “proposal to ban the wearing of high heels in the office” through to her less than parliamentary behaviour towards the Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow, who she plotted to have removed from the speaker’s chair accusing him of opportunism and disloyalty. After Bercow’s wife, Sally, was approved as a Labour parliamentary candidate and gave an interview about her personal life, Dorries argued that the Bercows were damaging the historic respect the office of Speaker had. In January 2010, she refused to honour the tradition of MPs of standing still and allowing the Speaker to pass them in the corridors of Parliament in protest to Bercow’s decision not to wear the Speaker’s traditional uniform.

Perhaps all this explains why Nadine Dorries was defeated so easily by Hazel Grove Lib Dem MP Andrew Stunnel in the 2001 general election by a superb 8,435 majority.

Northerners are glad that Nadine Dorries moved away from our area, but it’s very sad that she was parachuted into a safe seat in Mid Bedfordshire in 2005. She should move out of politics altogether after this latest fiasco, as she has proven just how out of touch with the 21st century she really is.

Comments

  1. Louise, London October 3, 2010 at 6:36 pm

    Great piece; don’t forget her own dodgy expenses claims and ridiculous tantrum about the relevation of MPs’ expenses – what a hypocrite.

    http://lefteyerighteye.wordpress.com/2010/10/03/2-minute-rant-nadine-dorres-proves-the-problem-with-her-own-system/

    2 MINUTE RANT: Nadine Dorres proves the problem with her own system « Libertarian Lou’s Blog

  2. Chris Paul October 3, 2010 at 3:32 pm

    Well said. Dorries appeared to admit to the Telegraph that she did not have a main home that fitted the definition of such a thing. Much study is yet to yield up anything close to a main home for much of her tenure as an MP. Her daughter employing activity is scandalous. Her business track record and that of her husband is scandalous too – with only one set of accounts or return submitted for multiple companies over many years. And so on and so forth. She is not IMO close to being a fit and proper person to be an MP, not even for the Tories.

  3. Chris Horner October 3, 2010 at 3:21 pm

    Great post.

  4. Pingback: Tweets that mention Why is Nadine Dorries so belligerent? | Steve Middleton -- Topsy.com

Comments are closed.