Sunday, 5 July 2009

out of his own mouth

twelve years in Parliament and Mr Salter doesn't turn up to move his own amendment and then doesn't know the House procedures. Says it all really. Here it is, better than I could. As those commenting elsewhere on this blog have said, he is going ahead of further damaging revelations. Oh dear.


Worried Colleague. said...

I am afraid that in the grip of severe alcoholic dependency, other former Members have had difficulties with attendance/committee procedure - even voting.
One in particular on the Labour benches was offered professional help by the Whips' office. He refused - and, in fact, died in harness.
It is a shame for Martin and his constituents that he has not been able to learn from that sad example.
It really is time now for the National Executive Committee and constituency officers to step in. I hear that there have been complaints to the former from the latter.

Anonymous said...

Believe me, I have no time for Martin Salter, and do not support him in any way, but the Comment above is unfair and should be deleted unless there is evidence to support it.

jane said...

"unfair"? (horse laugh). Like the Evening Post is "unfair"? do you want that "deleted" too? Huh. I have no idea whether Mr Salter has a drink problem or not, last time I saw him (in 2005) he did not appear to have such a problem. But people are saying that he does. For someone in public life this is a serious matter, and he also tells us he is going to take up a senior position with a national charity when he leaves Parliament, and they presumably do not want an alcoholic on their staff. So if this is not true let him sue. I have not said it because I don't know, but I have let others say it.

Lesley said...

Is the last Anonymous writer making threats towards anyone who raises any questions about Martin Salter?
I did not read Worried Colleagues' comments as being unfair - they were written in a factual manner- presumably from someone who is in a position to know the facts, judging from what they have said about procedures when MPs have personal problems.

Any business or company has to have procedures to follow when employees of any sort fall into difficulties - what is unfair about that? I would have thought it unfair on both the individual and the company or business not to have them.

Anonymous said...

I have a feeling that he's pretty keen to avoid getting into litigation with you.

However, this blog might one day be mysteriously shut down without any explanation.

Did you find out what happened to your last one?

Scribe said...

Believe you me, Lettsie was being kind! He could have given the real detail.

Anonymous said...

He daren't sue Quentin Letts and the Daily Mail. All anyone has done is to react to the innuendo from Letts - and people who are in the know have given the background to it.
This is what columnists do - offer hints and titbits that are there to be developed. So far nobody seems to have denied the alcoholism suggestions - just said that it isn't very nice to make them.

Anonymous said...

If a colleague owns up and admits to a failing there is no retribution and all available help is given.

If they choose not to do so then they are on their own.

Sadly, this is the course he has chosen.