Michael Portillo 1, Sarah Vine 0 Photo: Youtube screengrab
Show Hide image

WATCH: Daily Mail columnist and Michael Gove's wife Sarah Vine slammed for her "Mr Spock" Miliband comment

Michael Portillo lambasts Sarah Vine's comparison of Justine Miliband to the late Mr Spock in her Daily Mail column this week.

Sarah Vine talked about newspaper ethics with Michael Portillo and Alan Johnson yesterday evening on BBC's This Week. Andrew Neil, sat back, with a smile on his face. Why? Just watch this fascinating takedown: 

Here's a juicy extract: 

Portillo: "Well, Sarah in her article about Mrs Miliband compared her to an alien - compared her to Mr Spock and said that a government under Ed Miliband would bring a Stalinesque situation. I mean that was pretty tough talk, particularly from someone who's in a position to know how vulnerable you are..." 

Vine: "It's interesting because when I started out in the process I was - well not exactly a sensitive flower - but certainly a much more nicer person than I am now. You just get tough. You have to get tough, otherwise you just can't survive it. 

Portillo: "Yeah but there's something else going on: the corrupting influence of newspapers. Newspapers want you to write that sort of vile stuff. I mean that lady has done nothing wrong in life except that she happens to married to the leader of the opposition. To compare her to alien or Mr Spock in my view is not justified." 

Burn.
 

Here's an extract from Vine column in the Daily Mail yesterday: 

The one thing that was totally lacking from her [Justine Miliband] interview [with BBC on Tuesday], however, was humour. That and any sign of warmth, empathy or fallibility.

Intellectually, I’m certain she understands these concepts. But, like the late Mr Spock, one gets the impression she considers them unnecessary, inconvenient and wholly surplus to requirements.

I'm a mole, innit.

Getty
Show Hide image

Could Jeremy Corbyn still be excluded from the leadership race? The High Court will rule today

Labour donor Michael Foster has applied for a judgement. 

If you thought Labour's National Executive Committee's decision to let Jeremy Corbyn automatically run again for leader was the end of it, think again. 

Today, the High Court will decide whether the NEC made the right judgement - or if Corbyn should have been forced to seek nominations from 51 MPs, which would effectively block him from the ballot.

The legal challenge is brought by Michael Foster, a Labour donor and former parliamentary candidate. Corbyn is listed as one of the defendants.

Before the NEC decision, both Corbyn's team and the rebel MPs sought legal advice.

Foster has maintained he is simply seeking the views of experts. 

Nevertheless, he has clashed with Corbyn before. He heckled the Labour leader, whose party has been racked with anti-Semitism scandals, at a Labour Friends of Israel event in September 2015, where he demanded: "Say the word Israel."

But should the judge decide in favour of Foster, would the Labour leadership challenge really be over?

Dr Peter Catterall, a reader in history at Westminster University and a specialist in opposition studies, doesn't think so. He said: "The Labour party is a private institution, so unless they are actually breaking the law, it seems to me it is about how you interpret the rules of the party."

Corbyn's bid to be personally mentioned on the ballot paper was a smart move, he said, and the High Court's decision is unlikely to heal wounds.

 "You have to ask yourself, what is the point of doing this? What does success look like?" he said. "Will it simply reinforce the idea that Mr Corbyn is being made a martyr by people who are out to get him?"