As MPs go, she not a bad one and she and I have traded a few messages on the subject. But this is a rather odd decision on her part, and seems a) a bit strange and b) rather out of character.
Hopefully, she will reconsider by the time we come to the third reading in March.
Let’s hope her constituents one day refuse to vote for her for the same reason.
To right: can’t be arsed!
She’s looks like a lesbian anyway haha
Nothing wrong with that!!
Oops! Do you wish you hadn’t said that?
SO she didn’t feel strongly about it… did her constituents feel strongly about it? She is voting for them not for herself. One day I hope all MP’s who take this line of voting on their own ideals get removed from office.
Er, that is just weird. MPs aren’t paid to only vote on matters of a personal interest.
I’ve always wondered what lady Orcs look like and now I know.
Blimey, she must be the only one who didn’t feel strongly about it. Still, if that’s the case it seems reasonable enough to abstain.
I’m no apologist for her, but I know for a fact she has listened carefully to the pro-Equal Marriage side of things (because I’m one of the people she patiently spoke with) I also know Anne has heard the C4M lot, and became rather irritated with their antics.
I suspect that when she indicates she wants to see the Bill amended (and it really *does* need some re-thinking in places. It’s been sloppily drafted) she will be much more inclined to get behind it.
I hope that comes to fruition, Sasha. Aside from the ‘safeguards’ and protections for the religious denominations, I can’t think of an additional amendment that would make it stronger than it already is. The ECHR has already ruled out inteference in the internal affairs of EU countries legislating for equal marriage. so it will be interesting to see the modifications if any emerge in the coming weeks.
Pure cowardice. I wonder how many bills she’s not voted on because she didn’t feel strongly for or against, or is it just this one bill? Why is she an MP in the first place confuses me if she can’t be impartial?
I wonder how her fellow Tory colleague Sarah Newton voted? She too said she would listen to her constituents most of whom were against even though she claimed she never said she didn’t support equal marriage.
If religious beliefs are a primary consideration for these MPS, then perhaps a closer look should be taken to justify their being in government. Parliament is not supposed to be promoting religion or religious beliefs of their constituents or allowing them to influence legislation. It’s a dangerous line to cross. It’s going to be the undoing of the Tory party. All of those who voted no or abstained did so at their own peril come election time. Some will get re-elected of course in constituencies that are safe for them, but some won’t. Foolish woman.
I don’t believe her. I don’t believe that she didn’t and doesn’t feel strongly about same sex marriage.
I believe that in fact she felt and feels so strongly about this issue, particularly after she received “more than 1000 letters” regarding the matter, that she wracked her brains for a way out and found it in simply avoiding the voting.
And that is, indeed, cowardly!
An abstention is a “no”. If she doesn’t “feel strongly” equality, that’s a damning message to send out to the voters. She should count herself lucky that enough people felt “strongly” enough about granting women the right to own property, vote, be protected by sex discrimination legislation.
Actually an abstention is neither a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’
Although I’m surprised she would take that stand having made an admirable fuss over the wrongful use of her picture without her permission in the C4M leaflets
Maybe thats how people will feel about you when its time to vote.
Maybe people won’t bother to vote for her if she can’t be bothered to do the job she is very well paid to do!!! What an arrogant idiot!!!
What is it, Pink News, with all of this “naming and shaming”?
It smacks of a medieval witch hunt and seems you are going all out to bait and whip up your visitor base into a frenzy of coughed and spluttered indignation and is childish in the extreme.
If you want to be taken seriously as the broadsheet-level bastion of journalism you profess to be at the foot of this page then jolly well grow up why don’t you already!!
If you’re going to start to bring with hunts into it, then it’s probably best to ask the Tories about those, they’re the masters of witch hunts. Witch hunts against the poor, the vulnerable, the different. They and their ‘media’ have continually made the poor and unemployed out to be ‘workshy scroungers’; the disabled to be ‘fakers’; immigrants to be ‘criminals and terrorists’; even though some Tories back gay marriage, others have called gay people dangerous ‘militants’ for wanting equality. The list is endless. You have some nerve mentioning witch hunts.
I think it’s entirely appropriate to name and shame MPs
Their voting record is actually public knowledge – there’s nothing hidden about it but it rarely gets to see the light of day.
I fully support Pink News doing this.
The anti’s must have been really hard up using her photograph.
From the Tory Party Website: “We want a fairer society and will use every lever to tear down barriers that prevent equality. We want every child in Britain to have the best possible chance in life, irrespective of background, their gender, sexuality or the colour of their skin”. Perhaps Ms Milton should have read Tory policy before deciding to be so disgustingly complacent?
What a utterly useless MP. Couldn’t even be bothered to learn about it. I would rather she had a opinion than no opinion at all.
Better change that to former Whip! Any MP can now tell her that they won’t listen to her because they’re just not that interested in whatever vote is coming up. Is it too early to award the 2013 “Do as I say, not as I do” Award?
I suspect the fact that she’s now a Tory Whip will probably be the REAL reason she abstained…
It’s so that she can command both the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ Equal Marriage Voters equally…
She may well have been directed to do that by Tory HQ no…?
I think Ms Milton has shown lack of judgement simply by failing to recognise that her decision to ‘decline to vote’ can be read in a multitude of ways. She is being vague at the moment when real decisions need to be made by the people who are in charge of the country. I do hope that Ms Milton develops a few feelings on the issue in the coming weeks or, at the very least, acts on whatever impulse it was that made her join the Conservative Party in the first place, and then accept a job in David Cameron’s government, and ‘feels’ a little more strongly about supporting her boss.
Be careful don`t let those fence pickets in your twat leave any splinters.
Can she, please, tell the crying child that his other Dad is being sent back to Brazil because his 2 Dads weren’t allowed to marry, because SHE DIDN’T FEEL strongly about it?
Can she, please, tell the foster teen that he can’t be permanently adopted, but can be removed at any moment, by the only women that loved and cared for him, because his moms are not married, and his basic human rights to be loved and feel secure are being intentionally withheld because SHE DIDN’T FEEL strongly about it?
I know of no better definition of “evil” than someone that doesn’t feel strongly about basic human rights. This isn’t politics, it’s human LIFE!
Anne Milton is sitting on the fence. MPs like her who refuse to comment should not be entitled to discuss issues further or has she forgotten that she is a public servant and it is her job to argue and amend/change/create bills. What an absolute coward. Thank God I have never lived in the Surrey region
I find her response decidely odd for an MP who by their very nature are supposed to represent their constituents on matters that for some of her constituents matter a great deal and have a profound impact on their lives. For to make this statement that implies that she hasn’t even gone through any kind of internal processes and consideration on behalf of her constituents, both for and against same sex marriage is both mind-boggling & deeply undemocratic & a failure in her role as MP. I would assume then by her own reasoning then all votes should be taken using the yard stick of whether she
herself has a strong view on something, so for example, fishermen wod be
Poorly represented if she felt ambivalent about fishery policy. She’s clearly tried not to attach her opinions to either side of the argument, and with using this excuse she has completely undermined her credibility as an MP.
Coward. Absolute coward and idiot..
I would have more respect for her if she voted against it. But to say it was unimprotant makes you even more stupid. Open your fucking eyes. Itiot
An elected official has a duty to represent his or her constituents – not to base voting on how he or she feels, religious temperament, or which way the wind is blowing. Sometimes that means taking constituent input and reflecting that in voting. Other times that requires advocating and voting for unpopular measures to create a fairer society. By abstaining she has done neither.
But you have no problem with picking up your paycheck…and do u really deserve that? You should bury your head in deep sand…take your time to see what might happen? Someone at some point will deliver the results..
Coward … it’s her job to make these decisions.
What is the woman in parliament for unless it’s to represent her constituents – both gay, straight and everyone under the rainbow banner.
If she thinks this way, and hasn’t an opinion on the subject she obviously hasn’t read enough about it nor spoken to those whom it will affect.
MPs surely have opinions on vital matters – why hasn’t she one on same-sex marriage?
an abstained vote is a vote against!
No – it’s not
It’s neither a ‘yes’ nor a ‘no’…(by definition)
…it’s not counted either way…
ie so that she can command both the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ Equal Marriage Voters equally…