It is with sadness that I will be stepping down from the whips office
following a short period staying on to help the new leader through the
transitional period. It has taken a lot of thought over the summer and I
believe it is the right and fair thing to do given Jeremy's victory.
I congratulate him on that victory, on bringing hope to many, of the increases in new members and the chance to look at issues afresh. The chance to shake Westminster up and rebuild the Labour Party. I am particularly pleased that Jeremy is going to radically change our housing policy and our attitude to the EU referendum.
Jeremy is a principled, kind and throughly decent person who wishes only the best for others and his demeanour is to be applauded.
Having had the opportunity to speak to Jeremy at length whilst we were away together in Latin America it was clear we both had much in common but there is no getting away from the fact that there are issues where we strongly differ. That breadth of view is healthy for the Labour Party as Jeremy has acknowledged.
However those differences will be tested.
Being a whip and not voting for the leader is unfair - it is a resigning matter. I believe it is quite right to be up front and clear about those differences now, not later.
We broadly or wholly agree on Europe, agree on building more council houses and tackling the private rented sector, on renationalising the railways, on the need to fix broken markets and deal with private rented housing, more protection for workers' rights, scrapping tuition fees, creating a National Education Service (like the NHS for healthcare), ending child poverty, ensuring the NHS is completely publicly run, some degree of rent controls, more investment in the arts and many other issues.
At the last election I like many of the volunteers who campaigned for the Labour Party in Hyndburn knocked on doors and stood behind our manifesto pledges which included fiscal responsibility, controls on immigration as well as policies on strong defence, membership of NATO, Trident nuclear submarines and a degree of welfare reform. These are issues where Jeremy and I have differing views.
MPs now must face up to this dilemma; their principles, current Labour policies which they stood on in May, Jeremy's victory and his manifesto for radical change, in Hyndburn the 18,000 votes Labour received in May or, the greater number of people who thought about voting Labour in May and then there are the Labour Party members in Hyndburn whom I know will hold strong views on some of these issues.
Each MP will deal with this dilemma in their own way and Jeremy has been very clear about his respect for people with differing views. He acknowledges he himself has held differing and principled views for over 30 years and voted against the Party over 500 times. We all agree that the Labour Party must remain a broad church appealing to a wide range of voters to be electorally successful.
In the end I want to stand by what I have always stood for; traditional blue collar Labour values and I believe it is both honourable and decent as well as the best for Jeremy (and myself) that I speak on these issues from the backbenches.
I congratulate him on that victory, on bringing hope to many, of the increases in new members and the chance to look at issues afresh. The chance to shake Westminster up and rebuild the Labour Party. I am particularly pleased that Jeremy is going to radically change our housing policy and our attitude to the EU referendum.
Jeremy is a principled, kind and throughly decent person who wishes only the best for others and his demeanour is to be applauded.
Having had the opportunity to speak to Jeremy at length whilst we were away together in Latin America it was clear we both had much in common but there is no getting away from the fact that there are issues where we strongly differ. That breadth of view is healthy for the Labour Party as Jeremy has acknowledged.
However those differences will be tested.
Being a whip and not voting for the leader is unfair - it is a resigning matter. I believe it is quite right to be up front and clear about those differences now, not later.
We broadly or wholly agree on Europe, agree on building more council houses and tackling the private rented sector, on renationalising the railways, on the need to fix broken markets and deal with private rented housing, more protection for workers' rights, scrapping tuition fees, creating a National Education Service (like the NHS for healthcare), ending child poverty, ensuring the NHS is completely publicly run, some degree of rent controls, more investment in the arts and many other issues.
At the last election I like many of the volunteers who campaigned for the Labour Party in Hyndburn knocked on doors and stood behind our manifesto pledges which included fiscal responsibility, controls on immigration as well as policies on strong defence, membership of NATO, Trident nuclear submarines and a degree of welfare reform. These are issues where Jeremy and I have differing views.
MPs now must face up to this dilemma; their principles, current Labour policies which they stood on in May, Jeremy's victory and his manifesto for radical change, in Hyndburn the 18,000 votes Labour received in May or, the greater number of people who thought about voting Labour in May and then there are the Labour Party members in Hyndburn whom I know will hold strong views on some of these issues.
Each MP will deal with this dilemma in their own way and Jeremy has been very clear about his respect for people with differing views. He acknowledges he himself has held differing and principled views for over 30 years and voted against the Party over 500 times. We all agree that the Labour Party must remain a broad church appealing to a wide range of voters to be electorally successful.
In the end I want to stand by what I have always stood for; traditional blue collar Labour values and I believe it is both honourable and decent as well as the best for Jeremy (and myself) that I speak on these issues from the backbenches.
No comments:
Post a Comment