Jump to content

Talk:Maria Miller

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Refusing to meet with the protesters

[edit]

I couldn't find any evidence that Maria Miller 'refused' to meet with protesters. According to Channel 4 News she failed to appear. According to Sense she declined an invitation to speak. I think the wording of this could be more neutral. Channel 4 News does say that she was criticised for this decision, so I think that that could be mentioned without creating bias. 86.158.80.242 (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Failure to meet neutral standards

[edit]

Constant attempts by users to inject bias and non-neutral language and statements into wiki page - for political purposes, one can only assume. Distortions created by presuming Maria Miller voted specifically against "equality" issues, when in fact she voted against entire bills as did large numbers of politicians from all sides of the aisle for a wide range of reasons. Also the morally non-neutral claim that voting against a perceived, any given, "LGBT" issue is actually anti-equality. That is a matter of moral and ethical perspective, not an objective claim. Wikipedia should not contain such sleight-of-hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MKPoosh (talk • contribs) 18:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have evidence for "political purposes"? In which case I think you should drop the issue. Contaldo80 (talk) 10:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Political purposes being personal political not that of a party. Clear attempts of vandalism which I assume are logged in the history section. Loaded language that is clearly not neutral such as the presumption that the opinions of the LGBT are the same as equality. Loaded langauge placing negativity on the "right wing" of the Conservative Party. Wikipedia is not a platform for opinion or attempts to slant perception or ethics. MKPoosh (talk) 14:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I added the text about Miller's voting record on LGBT rights and her statement on same-sex marriage. This is a notable issue. I now ask again: are you accusing me of 'political purposes', and if so what is your evidence? Where is the vandalism; what loaded language are you specifically referring to; where are the issues of neutrality; who has said anything about the "right-wing" of the Conservative party; where is the slant on ethics? In summary - what are you going on about? Contaldo80 (talk) 09:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-Life Activities-

[edit]

Miller was quoted in today's Guardian as being in support of a reduction in the 24 week time limit for abortions to 20 weeks ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/oct/03/abortion-limit-reduction-maria-miller). This despite the overwhelming failure of Nadine Dorries' related bill last year. A section should be added to cover this topic, along with some mention of lobbying by Pro-Life groups in her constituency.212.139.110.68 (talk) 00:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)twl00:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IPSA reference

[edit]

This needs changing to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Parliamentary_Standards_Authority but the edit option seems to have been turned off - can someone else do it for me please?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.31.56 (talk) 18:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spotting it. Done Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:40, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Expenses section

[edit]

Once her future as Culture Secretary becomes clear, I will strip out the detailed twists and turns from the article text and dispatch them in shortened form to the footnotes. For the moment, it is a current news story, some extra detail to assist readers is helpful. AntiqueReader (talk) 17:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What's missing from the section is what the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards said she had done:
In 2005, she designated the house she rented in Basingstoke from the wife of her constituency chairman as her main residence, rather than the larger London home in which she had been living with her husband, children and parents since buying it in 1996, for the purposes of the expenses scheme then in place. Although this was just for expenses "wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred when staying overnight away from her main residence for the purpose of performing her parliamentary duties", she claimed the expenses of her London home.
"It cannot be said that her London home was established or maintained 'exclusively and necessarily for her parliamentary duties'." (Para 124 of the Commissioner's report.)
Between 1996 and her election in 2005, she increased the mortgage on the London property by £310,000 to £525,000. On entering Parliament, she claimed for interest on the latter sum although the rules in force until July 2006 did not allow any claim for the interest on "any additional mortgages, advances or loans secured on the same property".
"Between May 2005 and June 2006, Mrs Miller was therefore not entitled to claim for interest on a mortgage in excess of the original £215,000." (Para 137.)
In 2007, she increased the mortgage by another £50,000 but failed to inform the House authorities, although she had previously signed to say that "I understand that I must tell the Members’ Allowances Section in advance about any substantive change to the financial arrangements for these homes, such as changes to the value of mortgages and bank loans".
"The interest on the additional £50,000 is therefore not an allowable claim." (Para 139.)
By failing to make any formal arrangements by which she could demonstrate that she was not claiming for the costs of having her parents live in the London home, the result was an "inappropriate use of public money." (Para 153.)
.. and what the Committee on Standards agreed with:
"Mrs Miller should properly have designated London as her main home rather than Basingstoke," but it decided that as "the matter was finely balanced", they would treat it as if it "had been correct". (Para 28 of their report.)
Despite the wording of the rules in force, "it was reasonable for Mrs Miller to claim the interest on her mortgage as it was when she entered the House, rather than as it was when she first purchased the property". (Para 39.)
"We agree that it would have been improper for Mrs Miller to claim mortgage interest for a mortgage facility larger than that at the time of her election" (Para 49.) but, in part because of inadequate records being provided, it was not possible to be sure that she had over-claimed before 2008. After that, it was clear that she had, including sometimes claiming more than the interest. "Mrs Miller considers that she overclaimed on her mortgage by £5,800 in 2008–09. We have examined the figures carefully and accept that that is a reasonable assessment of the amount that she overclaimed. We recommend this sum should be repaid." (Para 61.)
"we do not think there needs to be any separate finding in relation to her parents' living costs." (Para 61.)
".. this might have been a relatively minor matter" except that she "breached the current Code of Conduct by her attitude to this inquiry" (Para 69) including by repeatedly failing to provide information asked for, or to respond adequately to the Commissioner’s questions. Because of this, she should "apologise by personal statement on the floor of the House for her attitude to the Commissioner’s inquiries." (Para 70.)
The last bit is the reason for the 32 seconds of apology. 86.26.44.251 (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2014

[edit]

31.185.186.159 (talk) 23:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC) https://scontent-b-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1.0-9/s526x395/1506478_1397913243819708_5592382973331748113_n.jpg[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --ElHef (Meep?) 01:44, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Standing down of Miller from post of Culture Secretary

[edit]

Maria Miller has stepped down from being David Cameron's Culture Secretary, I think I have changed one location but not another as I don't know where in the source it is as it is not obvious. Can someone do it for me please? Wetter88 (talk) 08:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

[edit]

Some of the "expenses claims" section reads like a Guardian article. I'm not proficient enough in the ways of Wikipedia to "neutralise" it, but somebody needs to. (An example of what I'm talking about: it is not relevant in an encyclopedia article that IDS had promised harsher penalties for benefit frauds the day before supporting Miller.) --Codenamecuckoo (talk) 08:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. This section:
The newspaper later released the recording they had made of Hindley's call in which she can be clearly heard making the threat the Telegraph said she had
Is clearly erroneous. On the recording all she does is "Flag it up". This may have been intended to influence but it could not be considered a "Threat". There were no consequences mentioned, no threats at all. 82.46.109.233 (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If we mention threat at all (which in brief form probably should be included), it must only be included if attributed to the WP:secondary source (a WP:RS) which makes that interpretation, as it is not up to us to interpret WP:primary sources, especially with a WP:BLP. Widefox; talk 17:25, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Attributing the threat to the secondary source is fine, particularly as there are two sides to this: the day before her resignation, her PPS was claiming there was a "witch-hunt" of Maria Miller by newspapers because of her position and the issue of newspaper regulation, while at least one newspaper was phoned with an otherwise unnecessary reminder of exactly the same issue. 86.26.44.251 (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Many of the sources are Telegraph. Everyone hates this woman and is glad she's gone, Guardian or not. She threatened the Torygraph, don't forget. Still, now its all over, I'm trimming down brutally and putting to foonotes some details. AntiqueReader (talk) 20:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsitency

[edit]

The article states that Maria Miller was elected to Parliament in 2005. In the section on her reasons for resigning it states that:

"Asked, in 2009, to sign a declaration acknowledging she would now be liable, Miller declined and chose instead to simply stop claiming expenses for the second home in Wimbledon, having done so since she bought the house fifteen years previously"

If in 2009 she had had only been an MP for four years how could she have been claiming expenses for it for the preceding 15 years?

Can someone correct one or other of these assertions (or perhaps delete the whole thing until an authoritative version can be established?)

Peter D Rieden — Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.133.0.13 (talk) 17:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Edit is turned off so I can't add this - can someone add it please?

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmstandards/1179/1179.pdf

It would seem sensible to base discussion on this primary source not press reports.

The crucial difference between the £45,000 that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards recommended that MM repay, and the £5,800 that MM offered to pay and the Committee of MPs agreed to is clear from this report. The Committee agreed that on a strict interpretation of the rules the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards was right, but "Whatever the strict construction of the rule, it was reasonable for Mrs Miller to claim the interest on her mortgage as it was when she entered the House, rather than as it was when she first purchased the property" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.191.151 (talk) 19:14, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can't use primary source. AntiqueReader (talk) 21:41, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Maria Miller. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:49, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Maria Miller. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other constituencies' Associations

[edit]

I've simplified what's said about Miller's links with other constituencies. There are puzzles - how did the link with Wimbledon arise?; and re Wolverhampton North East the term "Patron" was used originally (without source), then altered later (citing Who's Who) to "chair" - and I've no access past the Who's Who paywall for authoritative details. But anyway the w3 there gives someone else as chair (and makes no mention of a Patron). It seems tht as regards both constituencies it's all a while ago anyway so the missing detail is unneeded.

If anyone thinks differently, knows more and has sources, obviously goferit.

– SquisherDa (talk) 18:28, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Updating

[edit]

Lost seat in 2024 election. First ever in 100 years in Basingstoke. 2405:6E00:2F09:D400:FD69:C31D:679A:7754 (talk) 09:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Maria_Miller&oldid=1255956432"