With all the kerfuffle at Heathrow today the resignation of a Government PPS in the MoD over Lebabnon policy seems to have passed off quietly. Jim Sheridan, MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South, on quitting said,"I don't expect my resignation will have any significant impact on the prime minister's objectives in the Middle East, which I genuinely believe to be honourable on his part, but I don't believe they reflect the core values of the Labour Party or indeed the country."
At least he knows his place I guess. Wasn't Robin Cook's resignation preceded by a couple of low ranking PPS's resigning? Beckett next?
7 comments:
Beckett won't go - she likes the perks too much - and has shown herself more than capable of Vicar of Bray levels of trimming to the political wind.
True... she'll be pushed before she jumps. Plus she'd never make as good a speech as Cook.
Just because I feel like it, time to dig out the old story of Mellor and Beckett going at it on Newsnight, and Mellor attempting to voice Labour's position for her.
A slightly irritated Paxman interjected, 'maybe we should get it from the horse's mouth'. Cue Mellor having hysterics, Paxman looking sheepish and Beckett doing her best 'I've just swallowed a mouthful of vinegar' expression.
Jim Sheridan represents Paisley and Renfrewshire NORTH not South! helps if you get the area right!! My point? If you can't get the area right what help have you for getting the other facts correct?
Hah, misrfected arguments are always funny. Your point anon is bollocks. So I made a mistake thanks to a misnformed ePolitix briefing, therefore all other information is wrong according to you. I'm not surprised you remained anonymous, if you'd put your name to it everyone would know you were an intellectuially inept tit and could tell you to your face.
I stay anonomous so that you can not personally attack me, you seemed to manage it anyway, my point remains that you shouldn't believe everything you read, try doing some independent research I think you may find it interesting! Oh and I never said the rest of your article was wrong I merely pointed out that if you cannot find time to research the facts about the person in question why would anyone believe you had bother to check the rest of the facts?
Of course I personally attacked you, you posted a crap argument. As for believing everything I read, I got a constituency name wrong by a matter of compass definition.
The most amsuing thing of course is that this one cock-up apparently brings into question the validity of what I might say elsewhere.
Still, one mistake compared to the Guardian's how many?
Post a Comment