« Nominations for Lifetime Achievement | Main | Nominations for Outstanding Parliamentarian »


The good burghers of Newark don't have to "keep" or "accept" and a marginal seat is never a "gift".

Let's see how Patrick Mercer conducts himself in the near future and we can see whether he deserves our full and uncompromising support as a Conservative or we should repudiate him. There can be no middle option of half-hearted backing.

I personally hope that he is both radical and loyal. Free-thinking MP's such as PM are a huge asset to our party - but our whips office should be more alert to the elephant traps that Brooon is laying for us.

For Gawd sake, can't you guys give it a rest.

Richard Tyndall. Your continued vindictive attack on the character of the previous MP has nothing to do with the situation now surrounding Patrick Mercer.
Each time this man makes 'yet another gaffe' and is criticised on here, the first thing you do is fly to his defence by posting your usual demented venom about Fiona Jones in your pitiful attempt to suggest 'you think he's rubbish - what about the last one' and it does not wash I'm afraid. It just illustrates each time you rant on that you have a personal hatred for her that just makes no sense and anyone reading your comments wonders why you protest too much.
I don't believe that any person here would support some moron who verbally abused Mrs. Mercer, but in weird Tyndall world it is acceptable to verbally abuse (dead) Mrs. Jones. What planet are you on you sad man?
As for Mr. Mercer defecting, that won't happen and who would welcome him anyway?
Your arrogant assumptions about the constituency party and the people of Newark? Better hope that the pressure and publicity doesn't become too much...someone may crack and your worst fears materialise. Here's hoping.

Mercer's experience of atavistic Tory tribalism in action suggests that 'The Nasty Party' remains as unpleasant as ever.

Yes, his reaction is a little naive. During my long period as a party activist I was frequently confronted by silly little men and women who accused me of 'disloyalty' or some other form of heresy.

To me these pitiful people, for whom their involvement with the party was clearly their whole life, were grist to the mil.

My reaction was to stamp on them like insects.

I know as a Party we've taken a softer approach to Mercer and Bercow than many activists would like, but this cannot last.

At some point both of these gentlemen need to be made an example to would be fellow travellers who decide they can bat for both sides and field for neither.

It would be worth the loss of both seats to spell out just how serious such disloyalty is taken. Bercow would be finished in politics if he was deselected. His replacement would bring in more talent to the Conservative benches. As for Mr Mercer, he may have been mishandled but should have taken it on the chin and moved on.

When we return to government we need to make it absolutely plain to the sort of backbencher who caused headaches for previous Conservative PMs that the principled differences are dealt with privately and not paraded before the cameras or by cosying up to the opposition.

Gross breaches or chronic failure to adhere to a basic set of principles of loyalty and discipline should spell the end of your political career. No ifs or buts.

Gross breaches or chronic failure to adhere to a basic set of principles of loyalty and discipline should spell the end of your political career

I'm a Conservative in my political philosophy. Always have been; always will be.

Why should that imply 'loyalty' to any individual I may personally despise, whether that be Cameron, some limp-wristed wannabee Councillor, or some old woman with open space between her ears?

(I think I've just about summed up the intellectual range of today's party in that last para)

Gross breaches or chronic failure to adhere to a basic set of principles of loyalty and discipline should spell the end of your political career

I'm a Conservative in my political philosophy. Always have been; always will be.

Why should that imply 'loyalty' to any individual I may personally despise, whether that be Cameron/Osborne, some limp-wristed wannabee Councillor, or some old woman with empty space between her ears?

(I think I've just about summed up the intellectual range of today's party in that last para)


as an admitted labour supporter you obviously hate to see your former MP revealed for the failure that she was. But it is about time you admitted what every one else in the town knew long ago and move on.

Your sad attempts to defend her fail because the facts are there for all to see. They are also relevant in this case because they are at the centre of the distinction between the two MPs. One who was the parties mouthpiece in Newark and the other who at least attempts to be the constituency's representative at Westminster.

The fact that she is dead has nothing to do with whether or not she was a bad MP. Something you seem to have a lot of trouble coming to terms with.

Mr Mercer is an honourable man who works hard in Newark so I'm told. I think he was wrong to do what he did - I'd guess that his 'I did it for the Country' is founded in his army tradition where his views where forged rather than through the narrow prism of party politics. Therefore we should take him at his word.

However, Brown's big tent is not the place for Tories to be. If "our side" has good policy ideas they should feed them to our Shadow Team and not provide policy prizes / credibility etc to an increasingly discredited government. The motto should be: if Tories have ideas share them with the Tory Party.

Richard Tyndall. Please keep posting your deluded defences and rants here.
Every vile and ill judged comment you make damns Patrick Mercer even more by your association with him.
I suspect he may wish that someone more worthy was defending him than you.

"chronic failure to adhere to a basic set of principles of loyalty and discipline should spell the end of your political career. No ifs or buts"

I'm glad you weren't around in the Whip's office in the 1930s, Old Hack - Churchill would've been out on his ear. The Tory party might then have been purer, but the country would have suffered in the longer run...


I doubt that you will find many people here - or in Newark for that matter - that will leap to the defence of Jones. Death does not turn someone from a bad MP into a good one no matter how much you might wish it were so.

So there is nothing vile or ill judged about making it clear that the people of Newark were glad to see the back of a bad MP and that this had some influence on their choice of the next one. I am sure that as and when Mercer either quits or is voted out (all politicians have a shelf life thankfully) then there will be plenty of people glad to see the back of him and willing to make that clear. Whilst I might (or might not by then) disagree with them, I certainly wouldn't say they didn't have the absolute right to say those things. Its called democracy. Something Jones obviously failed to understand.

But thanks all the same for your permission to post. Not needed of course but welcome none the less.

You are defending Mercer gamely but the essential charge against him is that he is helping the most disastrous prime minister ever in my long life towards being endorsed by the electorate. It is naive in the extreme to pretend that Brown wanted him for anything but electoral advantage as furthering his image of providing a "ministry of all, the talents"

Back in March you wrote " I no longer considered him a fit representative for the town - - - [but] he is still my friend". You questioned his judgement then as so many here do n ow.

Is there any chance we can drop this absurd, 'Gordon is beyond super-evil, and will kill the first born (and in fact already would have done so but for the fact he's so inefficient &c)' stuff? Worst Prime Minister ever? How? on what basis? Worse than Wilson? Callaghan? Major? Let alone, North, MacDonald or Goderich, to name but three. Claiming something that is patently untrue simply discredits the person claiming it. Much like claming that Patrick Mercer is anything other than a patriot, and that that is anything other than entirely estimable.

Traditional Tory , you do amuse me these days. The idea of someone like you who is too cowardly to post under their real name having the guts to stamp on anybody 'like an insect' is stretching credibility too far.

He's almost as brave as those relentlessly pro-leadership supporters posting under their own names. 'The courage, the courage', as Col. Kurtz almost had it.

"An MP is not elected to oppose or to govern. He is elected to represent his constiutuents as he sees fit. This is exactly the mistake I have been talking about. We do not under the British system vote for parties. We vote for individual constituency representatives."

We do vote for individual representatives, but on the basis of their claims at election time. Mercer stood on a platform of opposition to Labour. He does not have the right to turn round afterward and say "Well, I said that I would do X but in fact I've decided to do Y which is the exact opposite". The independence of an MP, and the freedom to act according to conscience, applies only to party, not to constituency.

It's no surprise that this post has garnered so many comments, the man is deluded if he thinks he can have any influence as a GOAT, further if he wishes to be associated with such a discredited PM and Chancellor, then I want my ball back!

ACT @1126, YES Callaghan is infinitely worse than Ramsay MacDonald (he was the first I was aware of and he got the measure of the Socialists!), Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain, Churchill, Attlee, Wilson (Brown just worse !) Macmillan (also just) Callaghan, Douglas Home, Thatcher, Major, and by a hair's breadth Blair (though he was more evil) .

And who knows Robinson aka Goderich prime minister for 5 months in 1827. I, for one, am not THAT old. North ??? History is ambivalent but I cannot personally assess him. On the whole ACT's reaction seems a bit facile.

There's not a Labour politician can be found today to give Brown a character reference (he even chickened out of yesterday's Darling fiasco)

However, Mercer - probably a very nice man, I'm sure - was foolish enough to lend him political assistance. Not what the Newark voters expected.

Traditional Tory , you do amuse me these days. The idea of someone like you who is too cowardly to post under their real name having the guts to stamp on anybody 'like an insect' is stretching credibility too far

Glad you're amused Malcolm. We wondered whether there was the ghost of a sense of humour lurking somewhere in your miserable psyche.

It suits me very well not to reveal my identity on this board, but I can assure you that those upon whom I've stamped - sometimes with the assistance of the law - know me only too well.

Richard Tyndall, insulted and vilified all that made righteous condemnation of his buddy Patrick Mercer, and in the manner of a true caveman delighted in his erroneous inexcusable vilification of the character and value of the late Mrs Jones, indicating that not only is this sad reprehensible creature a moron (an opinion apparently held by many) he is also no gentleman to lambaste the dead in such a villainous manner.

Tyndall, is the self-appointed high priest, judge and protector of Pat Mercer, not a protector of the poor, the misplaced or downtrodden but the protector of a shamed treacherous politician who said: "I don't care who you work for, whether it is a milkman or the Prime Minister, you have to be loyal to your boss", then knifed his boss in public at a time he knew was politically difficult for David Cameron.

The truth about Mercer is apparent to all but Richard Tyndall who in defence of his buddy makes abstruse excuses which are completely detached from reality.

The persistent egregious comments both past and present imply he is not concerned with morality.

I’m afraid Tyndall is only capable of blithe ignorance of the true situation pertaining to Patrick Mercer who is largely regarded to be a traitor, however, his crass error of judgement in no way justifies his crass behaviour which most of us regard to be unconscionable.

Sadly we can but hold him in contempt and spurn the misguided argumentative advocate like we would spurn a faithless dog a faithless little moronic sentinel.

Richard Tyndall. I don't expect anyone on a Conservative website to 'leap to the defence' of a Labour politician, living or dead. I make no complaint on that though it is regrettable nevertheless.

I think what I might expect of any decent person is to feel extremely queasy at your assertion that it is justified to make vindictive attacks on a now dead woman, (who rather obviously has had no involvement in this latest mess) and your shifty excuses for doing so in your puny effort to defend Mercer. It's remarkable that you can't stop yourself doing that, which illustrates I suppose an unfortunate lack of propriety in your DNA.

This latest gaffe is his own doing; he is the MP and has been for the last 6 years. He alone is responsible for his actions.
Your reasoning can be likened to the Governing party of 10 years blaming the previous Government for its current failings, some thing that politicians decline to accept, but is lost on you.

Speaking of which, as a none politician you seem to have accepted ownership of the Newark population - I hadn't noticed that you had been elected - with your suggestions that:
"many people" in Newark would not defend...
what "everyone" else in the town...
clear that "the people" of Newark were...
is about as risible as suggesting that Mrs. Jones "failed to understand democracy"
You are just being really silly now.

However I think that despite you flailing defence of Mercer, your response to CAWP is the most revealing (The Tories know that if they did that (deselect) they would lose Newark) for such an evidently close confidante of the MP - but then again, he has revealed as much himself in his musings regarding Nick Clegg, and his complaints regarding the bad treatment to his wife from his (your assertion) many 'supportive' constituents.
We await - not quite with bated breath - for Mr. Mercer's next move. It would be helpful if he made a proper announcement through the media, or even here at a push. Really, almost anything is preferable to reading your rantings.

Traditional Tory,I'm sure you'll be able to find someone somewhere who might believe you. Anyway,your original post made me smile.


as I remember on the last thread that we had this discussion you made similar groundless accusations which ended up with your comments being censored and the thread closed.

It seems you have still not learnt your lesson.

As such you have nothing to offer and I will continue to treat you with the contempt you deserve.


you are a self confessed Labour troll. As such you would doubtless want to defend to the last a Labour MP no matter what her faults.

But just like many other politicians who have now passed on I do not believe - and nor do many others from any side of the political spectrum - that death shoudl insulate a politician from criticism, particularly where it is justified.

As such I feel free to say that Cook was a bad Foreign Secretary, Heath was a bad Prime Minister and Jones was a bad MP.

That says nothing about them personally, only about their ability - or lack of it - in the post.

It is only you who seeks to diminish the argument and demeans yourself by making such ridiculous claims that - rather in the mould of the famous "Not the Nine O'Clock News" sketch - in death a politician becomes a saint.


interesting comments from someone who spent much of the last couple of years attacking Cameron in the basest of terms. And of course bveing on your mailing list I have all the emails you have sent out on that subject.

Do you not consider that you have given far more support to the Labour Government by those actions than anyone else here?


you did not say she was a bad MP, you said, and I quote, she was "beneath contempt". This from a dedicated public servant who stood up for what she believed in and represented her constituency in Parliament.

"Beneath contempt" is for those who talk that way of a dead woman.

I am sure Mr. Mercer, whose wife has been insulted (but at least she is alive) would recoil with horror at your disgraceful comments about his dead predecessor.

De mortuis nil nisi bonum!


After reading on this site about the tactics used by Patrick Mercer's campaign to unseat Fiona Jones, I'm afraid I find it hard to sympathise with either him or his wife. If you are prepared to dish out personal abuse, you should be willing to take it.

I had not even heard of this tiresome little man six months ago, but recently his name seems to be cropping up as regularly as a case of crabs in a Saigon brothel, which wouldn't be too bad except each and every time it happens it is negative for the party.

He may well speak with some authority and experience on certain issues; he obviously seems to think so, but until he learns to direct his fire with greater discretion, he will always be a loose cannon and a liability. He seems to be a Kilroy-Silk type figure who's ego refuses to be contained for long within party lines. As Disraeli said of Gladstone 'intoxicated by the exuberance of his own verbosity'.

Let's hear less of the pathetic twerp from now on.

Richard Tyndall is right up the pole about this. If he hasn't noticed that Cameron has done a lot to get his act together he must have been cut off from the real world out there on the oil rig too long.

I did not like the Cameron we saw to start with but like most of us we've worked out - and so has he - that New Labour is past praying for and must be consigned to the dustbin of history asap. Like Mark Twain said (paraphrase) "When circumstances change, I change my mind. What do you do?"

This government is not just bad and incompetent but it is led by a paranoid man who is seriously adrift - watch his hands; watch his mouth. He is leading us into the abyss NOW not in a year or two.

Everything is crashing about us and the overriding need is to get rid of him pronto - anybody would be better. And this is when your pal Mercer - whom you were slagging off in no uncertain terms in the spring, chooses to join his big tent. It's barmy That is seriously disloyal.

He didn't think much of him once about a housing plan if I remember correctly.

THIS treachery is in a different league.

I still don't like Cameron 100% but this is an emergency and in an emergency one can't be too choosy and he HAS improved immensely.


As I have explained very clearly before. How can it be treachery when it was done with the permission of the party whips?

If you now think the Conservative party can do no wrong (a worrying position to hear you taking) then why do you believe that in this case they were wrong to allow Mercer to assist on a Non-Partisan issue?

SImon RObinson.

NOt sure what you have read about Mercer's campaign against Jones. All he had to do was stand up and be there and he was liukely to win against her. Such was the depths of the antopathy towards her amongst the electorate.

Go read the local paper from the time if you want to see how she was viewed by the people of Newark.

Richard Tyndall, made it abundantly clear that he is a total ignoramus regarding the late Fiona Jones, allow me therefore to dispel his stupid notions that the lady was a useless entirely ineffectual MP. Fiona Jones, was a very conscientious and hard-working MP she lobbied for the A46 between Widmerpool and Newark to dual carriageway status to provide Newark with a fast route to the M1 and she told Charles Clarke that she wanted CCTV in Newark to control crime he gave the go-ahead.

Fiona Jones work included action to prevent the closure of at least 3 local companies including one with over 100 employees. The lady lobbied ministers constantly with results that the area was often included in beneficial initiatives and there is one individual who would not be alive today if she had not fought for him to be included in a drugs trial and he is not the only one. Fiona Jones, held a surgery every Friday and in Retford on Saturdays while Mercer only does monthly surgeries for just a few hours a month, perhaps because, he is too busy with making more than 168 TV/radio and guest appearances.

There is more but I think I have proved your sickening twisted condemnation of Fiona Jones is unwarranted, decidedly you are beneath contempt and beyond redemption. That would seem to be the general consensus, so do us all a great favour, and bugger off!


seems you are showing your true colours here as a Labour supporter.

SO what was the result of Ms Jones' work. DO we have the A46 dualling. No. Nor are we likely to in the forseeable future.

Nor should the CCTV be laid at her feet. It was porimarily the work of the local council that got this done in Newark. It is also they who run the CCTV system now. Not that the government needed much encouragement as they were happily putting CCTV in every town in the country. She might as well have been asking for the sun to rise in the morning for all the difference she made to the project.

She had one of the worst attendance records in Parliament and spent much of her time pursuing her vendetta against the police.

As I said before you only have to look at the records in the local paper to see the contempt in which she was held by the people of Newark.

Hence the reason she was voted out at the first opportunity. People realised what a big mistake they had made and dumped her at a time when the Tories were finding it hard to get elected anywhere else in the country.

So much for you view of things.

I think we can pretty well sum up Richard Tyndall's case for supporting Mercer.
What you've told us is that at the GE Mercer; with the backing, support, and the finance provided by the Tory party.
With the backing, support, finance and hard work of his local party activists and supporters - was campainging as an Indepenedent. Evidently selling himself on his 'personal' qualities but wearing the Tory colours.
A pity that you didn't bother to inform the electorate, because most of us understand in the real politic, that you vote red or blue, and that's what the public understand. And the Tyndall personal political preferences have no relevance.
All you've done here is try and defend the indefensible, attacked everything attached to the previous MP; her work, her life and her value, you've insulted and bullied other commentators to this thread, expressed worthless opinions and made unsubstantiated allegations. Now your latest desperate ploy is to wave the flag of the 'integrity' of the local paper - that bastion of 'shield of truth' that humiliatingly had to admit to cravenly promoting Mercer and disadvantaging Fiona Jones. Obviously, they were only pushed to admit that once she was dead and so many questions were raised about her treatment by the local press. Don't you take comfort there you shameless colluding man.

As I understand it, electors on the doorstep were told that Jones had been placed under arrest several times. This was untrue, as she'd never been under arrest.

I am apalled but not surprised at Mercer's poor record of constituency surgeries. It fits the profile of someone who would far rather be using his mouth than his ears.


as a Labour troll you persist in your defence of the indefencible. But of course you claim to know better than the people of Newark and the local paper all of whom were and are absoilutely clear about what they thought of Jones.

The idea that the election was somehow 'stolen' or that underhand tactics were used when no complaints or even comment on such tactics were made by the Labour team at the time all show how hollow your claims are.

In fact it seems from all the reports after the event that the only pepople acting in an underhand way towards Jones were her own party. Perhaps you are whining on the wrong forum.

Richard Tyndall. The way Fiona Jones was treated in Newark by Mercer, his supporters and the local press was well documented in the national press when she died.
I'm content to have others less involved than you or me to make their judgement after reading all those reports.
As someone wrote to your local paper:
"she demonstrated courage, panache and resolute character, pursuing what she considered wrongdoing"
which of course in a democracy is open to us all. The fact that you think she did not have that right explains your type of politics clearly.
What I am also content with is that those reading these exchanges will have formed, I sincerely believe, whatever their politics an impression of you that can only be described as utterly despicable.
But this thread is dedicated to and about the conduct of Patrick Mercer (no matter how many times you attempt to shift your argument to Fiona Jones) who to say the least and from what I read here; is considered to be a self promoting deceitful man, and the fact that you are his only defender here says it all about you both.
You keep on snarling, sneering, and debasing, it's your cherished forte to attack Fiona Jones in your desperate attempt to re-elevate Patrick Mercer with readers here, but fortunately most decent people are more circumspect when it involves the lost life of a Mother and wife, and have most likely already decided their views on Mercer.

the fact that you are his only defender here

I have no problem at all with Patrick Mercer. He is an honourable man who has served his country, unlike the professional windbags who make up most of the political parties nowadays.

Truse a socialist to chew the fat endlessly. You've lost your audience sunshine.

Fiona Jones is a complete red herring. What's at issue here is what Mercer did. So what did he do? He advised the government, after they asked him, on counter-terror strategies. What was he supposed to do when this request was made? According to the frothing maniacs who've sprouted on this thread, he was supposed to say something along the lines of: 'sorry Prime Minister, even though countering terrorism is clearly both in the national interest and manifestly above party politics, I have to decline your request. For you see, I fear you might "use" my work for your own selfish political ends, and that's obviously - to far, far too many ConHome posters at any rate - far more dangerous than terrorism. Therefore I can't help you do anything about terrorists, because even the slighest chance I might be able to contribute something in the fight against terrorists is greatly outweighed [for the loons on this thread] in importance by the possibility that somehow Gordon Brown might also thereby beenfit, somehow. And we can't risk that, because Gordon is worse than Satan and Stalin combined, in a bad mood. And yes this is my answer, even though it was Alan West who asked me. Oh, and David Cameron said I could'.

The pathetic partisanship by so many posters on this thread that David Cameron's alleged PR needs are more important than what's in Britain's best interests is a very sorry reflection on them indeed.

Well said ACT

Time was when the Conservative Party put the interests of the Nation above mere factional pointscoring.

Clearly, that time has long gone.

I think you were right with your earlier observation Traditional Tory, (also applies to Act) 'you've lost your audience sunshine'. Second time in two days you've made me laugh TT. Well done.

Nice to see there are still a few people posting to ConHome who understand the idea of public service and putting the public good before private or party gain.

Shame the rest sem to be Tory Taliban clones or Labour trolls.

By the way Seasider, the comment you posted supporting Jones was from a letter from a member of the Newark Labour party.

Like you, hardly a trustworthy source for opinion or information.

If Patrick Mercer's advice was so vital to the national good, one wonders why his job with the Government has now finished. Has the threat of terrorism been defeated? Has he already given enough advice to cover every eventuality? Surely as terrorism is an ongoing problem and terrorists have proved remarkably adept at finding new and imaginative ways of blowing us up, such a valuable advisor would be a constant requirement rather than a one-off placement lasting a few months.

You would have to be breathtakingly naive to believe that Gordon Brown was going to do any more than pay lip service to the advice of a political opponent, or that he regarded Patrick Mercer as anything more than a point scored against the Conservatives. Government of all the talents? He's not even interested in the talent on his own benches, hence the cabinet of supine half-wits he has surrounded himself with.

If Patrick Mercer's advice was so vital to the national good, one wonders why his job with the Government has now finished.

If you're really that curious, you might try reading the actual interview with Mr Mercer in which, guess what, he answers this very question.

Trad.Tory/Act...Too much fat chewing and bored already? Tut Tut - where's your stamina? I have to say though, nobody's twisting your arm up your back to stay here and read these exchanges.
I was drawn to this thread by the bigot Tyndall who is incapapable of defending Mercer without attacking the previous MP, as evidenced by his first comment here, not forgetting the previous exchanges when Mercer was demoted. Black bastards anyone?
It's nothing to me whether you keep/support him or not, he's just a loose cannon parading ('scuse the pun) as a Tory MP and all yours.
I'm sure he wasn't refering to posters here when he talked about appalling Tories.
But I do accept your point.
"Debating" with Tyndall is more like being the recipient of a violent verbal headbutting.
Me? I'd just love to send him a (Glasgow) kiss.


as Drusilla has said it might be worth actually finding out what the detail was of his appointment and then you would realise that it was limited in both time and scope to a specific set of public safety issues.

Unlike most of these enquiries which seem to drag on forever, West and Mercer completed their report within the time alloted and made the presentation to the government. Once that was done Mercer's involvement was at an end.


you will just never get over the fact that your girl lost will you. She was thrown out by the people of Newark and is not missed as an MP for one minute. Since you yourself admit that your only interest is in creating a myth about her popularity I do wonder why you bother.

"Debating" with Tyndall is more like being the recipient of a violent verbal headbutting.

Good for him. A violent headbutting is what every whining PC socialist deserves.

It's obvious that Mercer's socialist predecessor was a total waste of space. Good riddance.

You must me her last remaining defender. That's assuming, of course, that Fiona Jones isn't your real name.

Tyndall, so you think Mrs Jones was treated fair and square, there were according to you no underhanded tactics used and nobody made any complaints. Fiona Jones said that the local newspaper refused to give her equal representation, they had cropped her off a photo taken for the paper of an official visit to Newark and had refused to cover any of her activities for more than eight months and she was the only local politician excluded when New Year messages were printed.

Mrs Jones said: "Frankly I am appalled by the high handed behaviour of the management of the Advertiser, it would appear that their action in the run up to a General Election is clearly designed to damage my standing with the local electorate by giving local people the impression that I am not active in the Constituency and not acting for my constituents, nothing could be further from the truth. It would appear to me that they are using their position as a near press monopoly to influence the result of the election when it comes" Later in regard to dishonest behaviour she wrote a letter of complaint to Patrick Mercer.

I’m afraid, your head is as empty as a eunuch's underpants and I’m sorry to say an inspiration for birth control because what you have been saying is for the most part the most insanely idiotic rhetoric I have ever read, at no point were you close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. And for your edification I want to see the Labour government ousted, which is not going to happen, with the likes of Patrick Mercer blatantly undermining the Tory Party and its leader.

Fiona Jones said that the local newspaper refused to give her equal representation, they had cropped her off a photo taken for the paper of an official visit to Newark and had refused to cover any of her activities for more than eight months and she was the only local politician excluded when New Year messages were printed.

And the judgment of the Press Complaints Commission was..?

Trad Tory.....and the judgement of the press complaints commission was.....
action can only be taken against what is written, not on what is not written.


May I apologise most sincerely to you on behalf of all the good and decent Conservatives who are utterly appalled by Richard Tyndall's sick traducing of a dead woman in this thread.

I hope you will read the whole thread and see that Tyndall's revolting conduct has few friends here. "Traditional Tory" is in fact a troll who does nothing but condemn David Cameron, and whom you will not find posting on any thread discussing our poll leads.

I'm delighted Patrick Mercer took Newark but fully accept local paper bias (we suffer it against the Tories in our area so it goes both ways). I accept Fiona was a public servant and dedicated MP and I abominate the nasty names she has been called in this thread. From what I gather of Patrick Mercer, he is a military man of honour and would never insult a dead woman in this manner. I implore you not to assume Richard Tyndall represents him in any way.

Please look at the majority of comments on the thread for the mainstream Conservative view!

Trad Tory.
And no...I'm not Fiona Jones, which is the whole point...she is dead.
There are times when I suspect Dave Cameron must despair - how will he ever be able to lose the 'nasty party' image when here on the Tory's own website it's considered acceptable to demean a dead woman.
Anyway, keep yourself busy trawling through the PPC website. Last I heard the the editor of the 'Mail' resided there, and most likely also his attack dog Amanda Platell so loved by the nasty Tories when she puts the boot into Dave - eh sunshine?

activist. Thank you.


another poster hiding behind an untraceable ID to mislead people about the state of politics in Newark.

If you do not have the courage to actually post under your own name then I see no reason why anyone should believe a word you say.

You and seasider make a good team - both trolls misrepresenting the people of Newark and trying to rewrite history. Of course you know better than the people of Newark and the local paper - which incidently is very well respected and considered a good representation of the views of the town.

The fact is that when the people who are really unbiased - the courts in the case of Jones attacks on the police and the Press Complaints authority in the case of the Advertiser - looked at Jones complainst they found them completely without foundation. Says it all really.

It is notable that the only people now attempting to undermine Pat Mercer and defend Jones on here are Labour trolls and those with some axe to grind.

Keep it up guys. The more you write the more you reveal your own bigotries.

Richard Tyndall.
TradTory raised the PCC issue, not me, but I was correct in my response. Complaints are made about items printed against/about you, so it's self evident that if nothing is printed about you for months there are no grounds for complaint. That's simple enough to understand, and very convenient for some.
Anything else to do with the PCC and the press I have no idea or interest in.
I refer you back to the comment I made earlier when I said that her life had been scrutinised and reported on in the national press at her death and the public will make their judgement.
I am relaxed that mostly people are generous enough to follow the old adage about not speaking ill of the dead, it is accepted and understood in the mostly polite society we grown ups inhabit. A pity there's no place for you there.
Unfortunately, and uncomfortably for those of us with a more sensitive and thoughtful nature, you keep popping up like an ugly minded jack-in-the-box, spewing out your bitter and unrestrained bile.
I'm not one iota concerned what you call me. I just thank God I don't have a sick mind like you.


your hypocrisy is quite breathtaking. There is nothing thoughtful or sensitive about you. Simply the fact that you can't bear the truth to be heard about someone you supported and so you parade your false indignation as a means of stifling discussion.

I say again that since you have admitted your only purpose on here is to generate myths about a former Labour MP, why should anyone believe a word you say?

Richard Tyndall. (Sigh)
.."you can't bear the truth to be told/generate myths"..
The truth is in the public domain. Live with it.

.."stifling discussion"..
I wish I could stifle you, you horrible little man, but looks like we're still at it - un-stifled.

.."your false indignation"..
No. Justified indignation at your relentless smearing.

.."why should anyone believe a word you say"..
Or a word you say?

Look. I've given you a good run. You're a poisonous old faker. In fact (here's an opening for you) I'm about bored brainless with you, so lets leave it now.
I've told you on previous threads.
Words expressed here are forever and travel wide.
I hope you're proud of yours.

Actually yes I am very happy with my words (barring the occasional spelling mistake).

You have attempted to foist your revisionist propaganda on people at every opportunity and I am glad I have the local knowledge and the time to refute your misleading claims. Most for what you have said has relied upon people being disinterested enough not to bother checking the facts and when the information has been in the public arena and has (unsurprisingly) disproved your claims you have attempted to rubbish the sources (the local paper, the PCC, the decisions of the court).

So it has been rewarding to be able to highlight your attempts to mislead and show them for what they are.

I suspect that every time this subject arises you will repeat your mistakes and try to rewrite history but then that is rather the modus operandi of Labour at all levels whether on matters of mational importance or insignificant squabbles like this so it doesn't suprise me at all.

I suppose that you should view it as good training for your future political career though I am sure it will not be in Newark.

Activist - "Traditional Tory" is in fact a troll who does nothing but condemn David Cameron, and whom you will not find posting on any thread discussing our poll leads.

You seem to think you know a lot about me, 'Activist'. Funny I've never come across your ID before when I've been busy 'condemning David Cameron' and one might have expected you to have been defending him.

Obvious sockpuppet.

Richard Tyndall.
Latest update because I won't concede you one single point.
"people being disinterested....not checking the facts...rubbishing sources, paper, PCC, court"
The facts including the decision of the court are in the public domain as I've said several times, and people have been able to read and make their judgement. Her life was all over the papers for weeks after her death - couldn't be clearer.
Interestingly, there's a rumour around that a national journalist was in your neck of the woods taking statements and talking to people in the 'know' (so not you obviously) about her life with the intention of writing a book about her. If that's so, then I'm sure he would have been delving into newspaper archives and checking out the PCC for his research, so even more to be in the public domain for all these uninterested people to read I suppose. Though I expect you will be putting your fingers in your ears and be singing Ya Ya Ya Ya..not wanting to know.

The PCC. John said there was no coverage locally for eight months.
SnideTory said...PCC judgement?
So it goes like this in your reasoning right?
Letter to PCC complaining that no coverage for months.
PCC explains that action is taken on what 'bad stuff' a paper prints about you.
What has been said about you?
And your complaint is?
That no bad stuff has been printed about me.
PCC - go away.
Geddit yet?
That is fact. Relates to us all. I've said I don't know or care about anything else re local paper and PCC.
I think I've answered your main thrust with no misleading.

Another point. You said that the generous comment about Fiona made in your paper was from a Labour supporter. Wrong yet again. Better check your facts.

I think if anyone here wants to make a character judgement - check out hansard for maiden speeches. (don't go there - I'm ahead of you)
Read what she said about her predecessor. Then read what Mercer said about her. Tells you all you need to know.

And will you stop waffling.."you have admitted"...a troll, labour supporter, your only purpose...

You're right about just one thing here, and that is whenever I read that your friend has committed yet another 'gaffe' I shall be looking for your name in whatever forum it's presented.
It's guaranteed that you, Mercer's serial attack dog will be there demeaning Fiona Jones, because you can't produce any defence for him to stand alone on his political record.
And I'll be there to defend a woman who can't defend herself.


I suppose this is why normal people are turned off politics. Because in the final analysis they know that when all else fails you can rely upon the Labour supporters to lie and mislead even when it is clear they are wrong.

What is sad is that the actions of people like you demean not just your own party but the whole of politics because people wrongly assume that just because the Labour side tell blatent lies then all politicians must do so.

Now I am no fan of politicians as a breed but it is sad that people such as yourself do help to make the situation even worse. You simply ignore the fact that all the institutions we would normally rely upon (the courts, the police and to a far lesser extent the media) are saying one thing and yet you persist in saying another.

Thankfully in the final analysis the people who matter - the voters - made a sensibvle decision based on the evidence in front of them and their own experiences of their MP.

If you can't live with that basic level of democracy then perhaps you are in the wrong country.

Richard, you should be wary of thinking that the people smearing Mercer are Labour supporters. Several of them are devoted supporters of David Cameron.

Richard, you should be wary of thinking that the people smearing Mercer are Labour supporters. Several of them are devoted supporters of David Cameron

That comes as no surprise.

I am now wondering whether we shall have to wait for Brown to lose the next General Election before 'David Cameron's Conservatives' fall apart in the catfight to end catfights

Richard, you should be wary of thinking that the people smearing Mercer are Labour supporters. Several of them are devoted supporters of David Cameron

That comes as no surprise.

I am now wondering whether we shall have to wait for Brown to lose the next General Election before 'David Cameron's Conservatives' fall apart in the catfight to end catfights

What a post of condescending waffle. Who cares at all about your views of politics. You might have some credibility if you tried to represent something other than yourself and Mercer.
And don't you mention democracy - when Fiona Jones exercised her democratic right to question legal decisions - you condemned her, you hypocrite. And before you dive in again and mention the cost, it was the length of time taken by authorities to investigate that ratcheted up the cost - it wasn't her fault or responsibility for that. But you keep blaming her eh?

"As an MP she was indeed beneath contempt because she held the post and the people of Newark in contempt"....

It is perfectly reasonable that had she met you (did she?) she would have been justified in holding you in contempt.
Explain exactly the rest of your assertion that she held the post and rest of the Newark population in contempt.

"acted as nothing more than Blairs mouthpiece in Newark"...

Richard Tyndall- the comments you and others make on here regarding a deceased person are a disgrace and they should stop.

They do nothing to add to the debate. The debate being about the 'right' of MP's who take the COnservative Party whip being allowed to be a GOAT?

Mercer may have had 'permission' that doesn't make it right, nor mean that I have to agree with it, which I don't!

Your comment about having more independent MP's shows your true colours- does this mean that Patrick Mercer is now actively considering resigning the party whip?

The Tories in Newark and else where do have a choice- I know Newark very well indeed and am aware that the local party and wider support is deeply divided.

You say that "If the Tories want to keep the Newark seat they have to accept Pat Mercer for what he is until such times as he decides he no longer wishes to represent the seat"

Sorry that's not right- the local party can de-select him, although under the current set of local party officers that probably won't happen, but a lot can change over 2 years!


and my point is that if tey do choose to deselect him - an act which would be against the nwishes of the majority of the population of the town - then they would in all probability lose the town at the next election.

Certainly many of those whose support and voice the Tories need to keep Newark would not support them and would urge Mercer to stand again as an independent. Whilst that probaly wouldn't win him the seat it would certainly make sure the Tories didn't keep it.

The local party is well aware of this and I doubt they are willing to commit electoral suicide. They have way more sense than that.

And there is no disgrace in pointing up the failings of an MP, alive or dead. It is only people like you seeking to stifle debate and have your biases go unchallenged who make recourse to such rubbish. I doubt you would apply the same rules to other former politicians who you happen to disagree with.

Your view is hypocritical just like Seasider's.

Richard Tyndall.
And there's me thinking that you've been chatting to your friend over the week-end and he's insisted that you do the sensible thing - stop digging and stop attacking a dead woman.
One would almost think that his local party and wife hadn't told him that this thread was running and what was being alleged by you.

So, perhaps abcTory and activist and just a few others who are not happy the way this discussion has focused on berating Fiona Jones, (Tyndalls distraction strategy) and are prepared to stand up and say so, have realised by now that Mercer is obviously not the gentleman you hoped he was?

I notice the less strident tone now - "no disgrace in pointing up the failings"..
The disgrace is that the failings that were up for discussion were his - not her's.
'She' was not up for discussion.
Her 'failings' were not up for discussion.
And each time Mercer's conduct is highlighted here on ConHome you viciously turn your attention onto the now dead MP who had not even been involved in politics for years, and take your bile out on her instead of arguing your case competantly for Mercer. I repeat again - She was not up for discussion. Her 'failings' were not up for discussion. It is Patrick Mercer's failings that are up for discussion.

And like your other straw man pathetic responses I see you don't answer my questions to you on my last post despite the fact I've recanted every word you've said.
Because at the base of you is waffle, allegations, assertions, character assassination and lies.
Miserable creature.

Sorry to disappoint you Seasider but strangly enough I do have a life outside of putting you in your place.

And if you knew anything about my position on politicians (one articulated often enough on here I think) then you would know that I have no faith in any of them. Never have had. As long as they adhere to the party system which is a complete corruption of the democratic process then I will continue to hold them all in varying degrees of contempt.

Some, such as Mercer and people like Tony Benn or the Beast of Bolsover (or for example Frank Field or Kate Hoey) I admire because they do at least go some way to challenging the incorrect notion that we elect MPs to serve a party. Others such as Jones (who remains a valid comparison in spite of your sad attempts to rewrite history) and most of the current Labour lickspittles are worthy of nothing but absolute contempt for their actions.

I am happy to discuss the failings of any MP. You seem to think that you have the right to dictate what is dicussed. Not surprising you are a Labour supporter with absolutely no regard for democracy or free speech.

As always you remain a disgrace.

Richard Tyndall.
You've lost it straw man.
You've refused to answer my questions, and have the audacity to label me a disgrace?

Look to your own conduct.


I am, as I have already said, more than content.

In the end the point is that the voters made the right decision and Newark has benefited as a result.

If you can't take that then frankly it is tough. I am more than happy with the decision of the electorate and as and when I am not I will do my bit to try and persuade them otherwise. It has worked in the past and will, I am sure, work again.

Being a Labour man and therefore unfamiliar with the basic concepts of Parliamentary democracy and individual freedoms I don't for a moment expect you to understand this but, as with so much else you seem to find unacceptable, that is your problem and not mine.



As ever, it is his fellow Conservatives who find Richard Tyndall's attitude to a dead woman public servant to be a disgrace. I remind you that he has found almost nobody to champion his view on this thread. Can I assure you of my great respect for Fiona Jones MP and of my sorrow at her tragic life and death. It's one of the most horrible stories in modern political life. Mr. Tyndall's posts here are an embarassment. Please do not attribute them to Patrick Mercer who is a soldier who has been decorated for bravery as I understand it and who would absolutely never have the cowardice to attack a dead woman who was incapable of responding.

Please don't feed the troll any more! A poster who repeatedly demeans a dead person in the most vile personal terms of contempt is not worth your time and he does not speak either for the Conservative party or for Patrick Mercer.


This thread has stopped being about its subject and has been hijacked by one man calling a woman MP who died in the most desperate circumstances, mourned by her family, "beneath contempt". Would you please consider either closing it or declaring insults to her memory out of bounds? She is not here to defend herself. I shudder to think of any of her children reading this appalling thread.

Thank you activist. My experiment in lifting comment moderation has not been a success here. I'm closing this thread and will now go back and overwrite some of the offending comments.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker