Nadine Dorries makes untrue claims on the BBC

The Independent Conservative MP, Nadine Dorries, claimed on a film for the BBC's Sunday Politics that there had been "no legislation" before the Commons while she was in the jungle was simply untrue:

• 6th November: European Union (Croatian Accession & Irish Protocol) Bill
• 8th November: 6 Private Members Bills
• 19th November: Groceries Code Adjudicator Bill also Draft Care & Support Bill
• 20th November: HGV Road Users Bill also the Civil Aviation Bill
• 22nd November: Prevention of Terrorism (Amendment) order

So five government Bills plus six Private Members Bills she also missed a large number of votes. Not only on Government Bills but opposition led motions and also missed fourteen separate question time sessions.

She also claimed that other than going to the jungle "I have never taken a single day away from parliament" that one wasn't true either:

Source – Register of Members’ Interests, Nadine Dorries: 11-15 June 2006, to Israel hosted by Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI). CFI contributed the costs of flights, accommodation and some meals. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Official Guests Department) contributed to the costs of travel inside Israel, some accommodation and meals. (Registered 29 June 2006)

Parliament was in session between the 12th and 15th June, 2006. Matters debated that week, while Ms Dorries was away on the jolly she appears to of forgotten about - included:

• the Electoral Administration Bill 
• Lords amendments to the Work and Families Bill 
• the Fraud Bill
• A lengthy ‘European Affairs’ debate on the fallout from the failure of the EU to push through its constitutional treaty, which took place in advance of discussions at the European Council on what would eventually become the Lisbon Treaty.

The BBC should during the Daily Politics tomorrow correct the record as what Ms Dorries claimed was completely untrue but then she says her blog is "70% fiction" now we must assume that is the case whenever she speaks.

Westminster shocked as Mensch resigns her seat

The Conservative MP for Corby & East Northampton shocked Westminster watchers this morning when she announced she would be standing down as a Member of Parliament. The MP for Corby is moving to New York with her three children to be with her husband of a year, Peter Mensch, who is manager of rock band Metallica. Her decision to quit will trigger a by-election in the Northamptonshire constituency, which is a marginal seat.

The MP, who won her seat in 2010 with a 1,951 majority, said she was finding it increasingly difficult to juggle family responsibilities with her political career and her decision to quit politics was "devastating but necessary". 

The by-election is to be held on 15 November - the same day as elections for police and crime commissioners are held across England and Wales. Plus by-elections in Cardiff South and Manchester Central. The mayoral election in Bristol is also taking place on the same day. It is the first Conservative-held seat to be contested since the 2010 election and will be a major test for David Cameron and the coalition government.

Writing to the prime minister to announce her resignation, Mrs Mensch said: "As you know, I have been struggling for some time to find the best outcome for my family life, and have decided, in order to keep us together, to move to New York. With the greatest regret, I am thus resigning as a MP." She thanked the prime minister for his support during her time in Parliament, saying it had been an "honour" to fill the role.

In his response, the prime minister said it had not been an "easy decision" for the MP. "It is with enormous regret that I accept your resignation as the MP for Corby and East Northamptonshire, a seat that had been Labour for thirteen years before you," the PM said. "I do so only because I wish to support you in acting in the best interests of your family, which must come first."

Mrs Mensch's contribution as an MP was praised by a number of MPs, with Labour's John Woodcock describing her as a "breath of fresh air". But Nadine Dorries (Con Bedfordshire Mid) - a critic of David Cameron - tweeted: "Interesting that Mensch was managing her working hours through the PMs office and not the usual channel of the whips office?"

Andy Sawford, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Corby and East Northamptonshire, said: "Louise Mensch was obviously struggling to balance being MP for Corby and East Northamptonshire with her family and business commitments. I respect her for the honest way she talked about this and her decision to step down."

Turning to the campaign Mr Sawford said: "Labour is now looking forward to the campaign ahead, fighting for action on jobs and the economy, supporting our local services which are facing massive cuts and working with local community organisations. During the by-election we will focus on the two wasted years of Tory policies that have taken the country back into recession and left Corby suffering job losses in both the public and private sector".

Nigel Farage the Leader of UKIP tweeted: "Bit shocked at Louise Mensch's resignation. Another success for Cameron's A List...." Mr Farage asked by a number of people if he was going to stand for UKIP in Northampton East & Corby he declined to answer, so that is probably.

The Respect MP George Galloway tweeted: "A parliamentary by-election in Corby....Hmmm. Interesting..." So Respect will be putting forward a candidate as that is what he said before Bradford West, which he won, and he said the same when Manchester Central was announced on the same day.

It has been suggested by some that the London Mayor Boris Johnson may put himself forward as the Conservative candidate to get back into Parliament. However with a small majority of less than 2000, even Boris Johnson, despite being more popular than most Conservatives isn't going to turn that this one around for the Conservatives. If he did manage to pull it off the taxpayer would get a ten million pound bill for a by-election at City Hall.

The British National Party's Roy Davies did stand in Northampton East & Corby in 2010, but it is BNP policy not to speak to blogs, "freelance" journalists or indeed members of the public. So I'm unable to get conformation whether they will be standing or not.

Get used to the idea of Prime Minister Ed Miliband

Prime Minister Ed Miliband & Chancellor Ed Balls arriving in Downing St in 2015?

The failure of the Conservative party to stick to the coalition agreement to bring about Lords reform has ensured the Liberal Democrats will kill off the boundary changes that the Conservative party need to ensure they can win next time. The Conservatives trailing in all opinion polls are on course to lose the next election heavily on the constituency boundaries as they currently laid down.

If the boundaries were changed approximately fifty seats would be abolished a large number of them Labour including Ed Balls' seat of Morley and Outwood, Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham's seat of Leigh plus other senior Labour members. The Conservative seat of Bedfordshire Mid would also of been abolished but not many tears would of been shed for the loss to parliament of Nadine Dorries.

The Liberal Democrats were very clear that if Conservative rebels blocked Lords reform they would block the boundary changes. Not often you see a turkey vote for Christmas but by ensuring the boundaries remain unchanged all the rebels in marginal constituencies may well of won the battle with Nick Clegg over Lords reform but they've lost the war and extremely likely their own seats in the Commons too.

In June Conservative rebels had a choice, they could support the Lords reform bill and amend it under Prime Minister David Cameron or they could block it as they have done and after the next election sit on the opposition benches as the Labour government of Ed Miliband simply rams it through the Commons - with any Tory amendments heavily defeated.

The Labour party are as equally to blame for Lords reform failing by not supporting the programme motion but they had nothing to lose to see it fail now but without the boundary changes they had everything to gain from it being stopped. They put party advantage first and although it is a pretty shameful way to behave, they laid a trap for the Conservative rebels and they walked straight into it.

So in around two and half years as the current lot are to incompetent to turn things around we'll once again see; Ed Miliband, Ed Balls, Harriet Harman, Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham, Emily Thornberry and the rest of them back in government and there are only one set of people who will be responsible - the ninety one Conservative rebels who opted to break the coalition agreement over House of Lords reform. 

As leading rebel Eleanor Laing (Con Epping Forest) said on the Daily Politics "every MP has a right to vote with their conscience" she is right just hope she respects the Liberal Democrat's right to vote with "their conscience" and block the boundary changes that would of lead to a majority Conservative government. Now it'll be a majority Labour government but so long as your conscience is clear hey Eleanor!

The Tory rebels will reap what they sow

On the BBC Newsnight programme last night Nadine Dorries (Con Bedfordshire Mid) claimed that "House of Lords reform is not in the Coalition Agreement. So Conservatives don't need to support it. Unsurprisingly as it was Nadine "70% fiction" Dorries this simply is not true Part 6 of the agreement does propose reform of the House of Lords, with a wholly or mainly elected chamber on the basis of proportional representation with single long terms. The text in full:

"We agree to establish a committee to bring forward proposals for a wholly or mainly elected upper chamber on the basis of proportional representation. The committee will come forward with a draft motions by December 2010. It is likely that this bill will advocate single long terms of office. It is also likely there will be a grandfathering system for current Peers. In the interim, Lords appointments will be made with the objective of creating a second chamber reflective of the share of the vote secured by the political parties in the last general election."

The text shows that Tory rebels saying, like Louise Mensch is, it should be a first past the post system and shouldn't be elected on proportional representation (PR) either haven't read the document they agreed too in May 2010 or are openly proving they can not be trusted to keep their word. The other main moan from rebels yesterday was over single 15 year periods. The coalition agreement did say "single long terms" so once again the rebels are showing either they didn't read the agreement they signed up to or once again they can't be trusted to keep their word.

The Labour party's position is actually quite ridiculous. They support House of Lords reform but not the programme motion to ensure it passes. When asked on numerous occasions yesterday how many days the Labour party thought it required Shadow Constitutional Affairs Minister Sadiq Khan (Lab Tooting) refused to say. Graham Allen (Lab Nottingham North) who is the chair of the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee intervened on Sadiq Khan asking him "if he realises that Labour seems insincere in its support for reform" Mr Khan struggled in reply simply spluttering out "I thank my Hon Friend for his helpful comment".

The future of the coalition government could be called into question if the programme motion goes down - now this is what the Labour party want hence why they wont co-operate with the government over the programme motion. The Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives agreed to Lords reform in 2010. The Coalition government have put the Bill forward. It isn't perfect but Conservative MPs voting to wreck it will be a breaking of the Coalition Agreement.

In this event the Liberal Democrats would be well within their rights to either refuse to co-operate on anything they don't like or simply leaving the government. In that they'd be letting the Tories struggle on for a couple of months as a minority government before a motion of no-confidence in the government is put forward and a general election is required. Rebels like Mrs Mensch may well reap what they sow as her majority is only around 2000 and would be a main target for  the Labour party.

Free speech does not mean freedom from criticism

The Conservative MP for Mid Bedfordshire, Nadine Dorries, surprised many last night when she tweeted "I have now left the HIGNFY after party. As I looked over my shoulder, Reginald D Hunter was talking to my daughter.#wheresmyshotgunman".

Ms Dorries who meant the tweet as a joke and the "man" on the end of the hashtag was probably referring to something in the programme which is due to be aired tonight on BBC1 at 21:00. show it probably was a joke.

Problem is many people saw this as an inappropriate and some suggested even that is was tantamount to racism. One of her followers pointed out, as its turned out correctly "I predict that that is not the smartest tweet ever..?" replying that tweet Ms Dorries said "you are so PC and boring, you are now blocked".

Recently Ms Dorries sprang to prominence after she referred to the Prime Minister, David Cameron and the Chancellor George Osborne as "two arrogant posh boys" with "no passion to want to understand the lives of others" their "real crime" was to show "no remorse" about their lack of insight beyond Westminster.

However in February 2010. Ms Dorries was accused of being a "benefits cheat" when she took part in the Channel 4 programme Tower block of Commons. She was meant to live on the amount of money people of benefits have to. But Ms Dorries thought nothing of taking an extra £50 onto the programme to help her along. So Ms Dorries is really the last person who should be lecturing anyone on understanding real people's lives.

Personal attacks aren't particularly pleasant but Ms Dorries seems to believe its one rule for her - one for everyone else. Condemning anyone who criticises her. Whilst at the same time indulging in personal attacks on members and the leadership of her own political party. To be honest her behaviour is nothing short of hypocritical.

Free speech is something we should all fight for but Nadine Dorries seems to mistake free speech for freedom of criticism. Her tweet may well of been a joke, despite many seeing it in such bad taste however Ms Dorries must accept if she wants free speech to say what she likes other people are also entitled to free speech and to criticise what she says.