Should David Cameron be so supportive of his culture secretary Maria Miller? Aside from the Daily Telegraph, the paper that broke the story of her £90,000 expenses claim for a property used by her parents, other papers are now scenting political blood in the water.
No wonder. Her interview with the London Evening Standard's political editor Joe Murphy![ext]()
was rightly described by Guido Fawkes as a car crash![ext]()
.
With the parliamentary commissioner for standards now inquiring into her expenses, Murphy asked a series of relevant questions about those claims.
Miller began by reiterating that her expenses had been "audited twice independently". One of the auditors was Sir Thomas Legg, the former civil servant who ordered 389 MPs to repay sums wrongly claimed in 2009. Here's Murphy:
"Did Sir Thomas know her parents lived there? Mrs Miller was unclear. 'I obviously spoke to the fees office about my claims and they were happy that everything was in order,' she said."
Is that a yes or a no? Then Murphy asked for the identity of the second "independent" auditor. It transpired that it was the Conservative party. Murphy wrote:
"Her definition of independent may raise some eyebrows as the Tory panel was headed by the then chief whip and David Cameron's chief of staff."
After an exchange in which Miller says yet again on her expenses having been "looked at in detail twice by two separate organisations" Murphy followed up with a killer question:
"So why, then, did she suddenly stop claiming on the Wimbledon home in 2009 — just as the expenses scandal erupted? 'Because I think there was a lot of concern about the rules and, er, a lot of concern about, you know, the whole issue, and it's something I felt that I didn't want to be, sort of, mixed up in, the fact that I…'
Mrs Miller finally stopped trying to explain herself, and simply said: 'I just made that decision.'"
But Cameron is sticking with Miller. The Times quotes Cameron as saying![ext]()
she had his "full support". He said: "A newspaper has asked her a number of questions. So far as I can see, she has got excellent answers to all those questions."
Excellent answers? Given that the prime minister was in Brussels at the time, he obviously hadn't had the chance to read Murphy's interview.
It might also be useful for him to consult the Telegraph's timeline![ext]()
. In itself it is revelatory.
At any time, a minister's expenses claims will come under intense press scrutiny. But this isn't any time. Newspapers are particularly exercised by the problems posed by the Leveson report in which the culture secretary has a key role in deciding on the eventual decision about the form of a new regulator.
She is now enmeshed in a formal inquiry with a potentially disastrous outcome. She should step aside.
Full disclosure: I write a column for the Standard. Reported by guardian.co.uk 7 hours ago.
No wonder. Her interview with the London Evening Standard's political editor Joe Murphy
was rightly described by Guido Fawkes as a car crash.With the parliamentary commissioner for standards now inquiring into her expenses, Murphy asked a series of relevant questions about those claims.
Miller began by reiterating that her expenses had been "audited twice independently". One of the auditors was Sir Thomas Legg, the former civil servant who ordered 389 MPs to repay sums wrongly claimed in 2009. Here's Murphy:
"Did Sir Thomas know her parents lived there? Mrs Miller was unclear. 'I obviously spoke to the fees office about my claims and they were happy that everything was in order,' she said."
Is that a yes or a no? Then Murphy asked for the identity of the second "independent" auditor. It transpired that it was the Conservative party. Murphy wrote:
"Her definition of independent may raise some eyebrows as the Tory panel was headed by the then chief whip and David Cameron's chief of staff."
After an exchange in which Miller says yet again on her expenses having been "looked at in detail twice by two separate organisations" Murphy followed up with a killer question:
"So why, then, did she suddenly stop claiming on the Wimbledon home in 2009 — just as the expenses scandal erupted? 'Because I think there was a lot of concern about the rules and, er, a lot of concern about, you know, the whole issue, and it's something I felt that I didn't want to be, sort of, mixed up in, the fact that I…'
Mrs Miller finally stopped trying to explain herself, and simply said: 'I just made that decision.'"
But Cameron is sticking with Miller. The Times quotes Cameron as saying
she had his "full support". He said: "A newspaper has asked her a number of questions. So far as I can see, she has got excellent answers to all those questions."Excellent answers? Given that the prime minister was in Brussels at the time, he obviously hadn't had the chance to read Murphy's interview.
It might also be useful for him to consult the Telegraph's timeline
. In itself it is revelatory.At any time, a minister's expenses claims will come under intense press scrutiny. But this isn't any time. Newspapers are particularly exercised by the problems posed by the Leveson report in which the culture secretary has a key role in deciding on the eventual decision about the form of a new regulator.
She is now enmeshed in a formal inquiry with a potentially disastrous outcome. She should step aside.
Full disclosure: I write a column for the Standard. Reported by guardian.co.uk 7 hours ago.