Talk:Harriet Harman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in London may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents

[edit] Prologue

Apologies. Both of us editing at the same time. Frelke 13:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

" became Secretary of State for Social Security and was given the task of reforming the Welfare State. However, she made little progress" ..... I seem to remember that she cut benefits for lone parents and Tony sacked her because that proved so unpopular although it may have been his idea in the first place. Seriously , someone should describe this in the article. It is significant to her career. I am too biased to do it in neutral terms 20:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)mikeL


"The media contrasted his treatment with that of another fellow first-year, who had died on the way home after suffering the usual punishment, getting lost, and wandering on to some train tracks." - removed this paragraphy because it has terrible grammar and no references


The foregoing paragraph was written anonymously. I think the grammar is very good and that the information is relevant and that the entry should have been left alone 82.38.112.68 16:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)mikeL

[edit] Studies at York

Per the article, "Harman is a niece of Elizabeth, Countess of Longford and was educated at St Paul's Girls' School, London and the University of York, where she studied law." but York didn't get a law department until last year. Anybody know what this should say? — ThomasHarte 14:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

She studied politics at York- see http://www.harrietharman.org/about_harriet.html Vanky 18:20, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] image


The image above is believed to be a replaceable non-free image. It will be deleted on 2007-07-01 if not determined to be irreplaceable. If you believe this image is not replaceable, follow the instructions on the image page to dispute this assertion.--Sandy Donald 14:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] QC

Is she really a QC? She seems to have qualified as a solicitor, and in the article there's nothing about her being called to the Bar. Perhaps for QC read PC? Millbanks 21:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Her page on the Ministry of Justice's web site (http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/harman.htm) names her "Rt Hon Harriet Harman QC MP". --stephenw32768<user page><talk> 21:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Apparently solicitors can apply to take silk. I expect she got it because they couldn't face the fuss she'd make if she was declined. I'm told that being an idiot doesn't necessarily prevent someone becoming a QC. Heir2blair 11:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Voting record

I have added an objective voting record summary on key issues. Could people please not delete this as i feel it is more than valid to be here - on a MP's page. I haven't used any "weasel words" Chendy 11:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, we need to change this. Firstly, we don't bold things. Secondly it is POV, what does 'moderately' and 'strongly' mean? In whose view? We've a statement to say she's normally supported the government, that fine. It is thus unneccessary to narrated all the times she had. I think it acceptable to say something about the excesptions and perhaps a bit about her attitude to Iraq. But the rest isn't any good.--Sandy Donald 11:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I have originally sourced the information from "they work for you" where they list the info like that. On inspecting the source information form parliament i think you are correct that votes are either for or against. I will amend the information as opposed to removing it. Thanks for the clarification.Chendy 12:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Fine. But don't include all the places she has supported the government. The details of MP, who has been a cabinet member, has supported the government are not remarkable. What remarkable is only place she has either opposed it, or made it an issue by later trying to distance herself (e.g. Iraq). --Sandy Donald 12:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I see your point that to you and (those who understand the intricacies of British politics) that it is trivial to highlight what she is required to do as a cabinet member, but it is her decision to be in cabinet (ie not resign etc) and so i feel it is important to clarify the key/controversial issues she has supported etc. i.e. it is not an excuse to say she voted for certain things because she was in the cabinet - she was in the cabinet because she shared certain views and intended on voting a certain way.Chendy 12:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iraq war

I've removed the section on Controversy over the Iraq War. I think it puts undue weight on a single interview to have an entire section on this issue. --h2g2bob (talk) 14:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I restored it- it is certainly notable. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 17:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Newsnight and Today asking politicians awkward questions is not uncommon, is there more to it than that? --h2g2bob (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
This happened before her election as deputy leader and some people may well have been swayed to vote for her based on her agreement that an apology should be made. That was why such a controversy was generated about her seeming denial/about turn on the issue. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 01:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] private life

... not married? Nobody in her life? 217.230.231.188 (talk) 11:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes she's married to Jack Dromey. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)