And people wonder why politicians give themselves a bad name. In a Conservative-sponsored debate last night 63 Labour MPs voted against a motion on second chance education identical to an Early Day Motion they signed up to just weeks before.
211 MPs, including 86 Labour MPs, signed a cross party EDM expressing concern about the Government’s £100m cuts to second chance education, which will particularly affect part-time students and mothers returning to work. Last night, after an Opposition Day Debate called by the Conservatives, 63 of those Labour MPs voted with the Government, against exactly the same motion.
David Willetts isn't impressed: “The hypocrisy displayed here is breathtaking. These 63 Labour MPs were right to register their concerns at the £100m cuts in second chance education, which particularly affect part-time students and mothers returning to work. But in order to save the Government embarrassment they chose to vote against themselves. Their constituents will be very disappointed that they caved into the Labour whips instead of sticking to their guns.”
Any chance of a list of the names of the guilty men/women?
ReplyDeleteyes, the EDM database isn't searchable at the moment "for security reasons"
ReplyDeletethat is what www.theyworkforyou.com is all about!
ReplyDeleteI'm just checking over it now to try and combine the info and create a list!
actually, it looks like this turnaround was not a surprise move - it was actually being discussed within the debate - hardly the actions of a bunch of turncoats - more about the politics of playing politics!
ReplyDeletehere is the debate here - http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-01-08a.223.0&s=early+day+motion+317#g256.0
As a public service:
ReplyDelete1. Anderson, Janet
2. Austin, John
3. Battle, John
4. Campbell, Ronnie
5. Clapham, Michael
6. Clark, Katy
7. Connarty, Michael
8. Cruddas, Jon
9. Cryer, Ann
10. Cunningham, Jim
11. Curtis-Thomas, Claire
12. Dean, Janet
13. Dismore, Andrew
14. Dobbin, Jim
15. Doran, Frank
16. Dowd, Jim
17. Drew, David
18. Etherington, Bill
19. Field, Frank
20. Flynn, Paul
21. Francis, Hywel
22. Gerrard, Neil
23. Godsiff, Roger
24. Hepburn, Stephen
25. Heppell, John
26. Heyes, David
27. Hood, Jim
28. Hoyle, Lindsay
29. Jenkins, Brian
30. Jones, Kevan
31. Jones, Lynne
32. Jones, Martyn
33. Keeble, Sally
34. Keen, Alan
35. Kumar, Ashok
36. Laxton, Bob
37. Lloyd, Tony
38. Love, Andrew
39. McCafferty, Chris
40. McCarthy, Kerry
41. McKechin, Ann
42. Meacher, Michael
43. Meale, Alan
44. Miller, Andrew
45. Mitchell, Austin
46. Mudie, George
47. Murphy, Denis
48. Naysmith, Doug
49. Olner, Bill
50. Owen, Albert
51. Prosser, Gwyn
52. Sheridan, Jim
53. Singh, Marsha
54. Skinner, Dennis
55. Soulsby, Peter
56. Strang, Gavin
57. Taylor, David
58. Turner, Desmond
59. Vaz, Keith
60. Vis, Rudi
61. Walley, Joan
62. Waltho, Lynda
63. Williams, Betty
64. Wright, Anthony D
http://edmi.parliament.uk/edmi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=34435&SESSION=891
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080108/debtext/80108-0021.htm#0801095001118
They must be named!
ReplyDeleteThis is effecting many. I know this includes ministerial training colleges where often people with an unrelated degree go on to do a same level degree in theology. I am very aware of the problems in that sector.
Back to the guilty MPs, they should be drummed out of office as they are clearly but shivers in search of a backbone to crawl up!
I suggest having a look at the text of the motion before the House on the Order Paper for that day (scroll down a bit).
ReplyDeleteThe original motion and the amendment are not mutually exclusive. As one MP pointed out in the debate you could support both without being hypocritical.
You can 'support the Government's decision to re-prioritise funding to adult learners going into higher education for the first time', whilst still 'calling on the Government to minimise the damage this measure will do to the OU and Birkbeck'.
Sadly the subtleties get easily lost.
As someone who has never had a degree and is doing one at the ripe old age of 54 on top of a full time job and family, I feel (yet again) thoroughly dissed by this Government. As it is each module costs over £200 and a steep rise in the cost will make it prohibitive. As an oldie I am not entitled to a student loan or any other kind of aid. Typical Labour - trying to prevent people from trying to better themselves and their prospects.
ReplyDeleteIt is also unfortunate that the open university has not taken a more ethical stance and has been involved in the biggest PFI/PPP ever to provide MILITARY TRAINING with Raytheon arms dealers, Qinetiq, Serco, EDS...at St Athans
ReplyDeleteGood stunt this. Monitor the EDMs. When you get a good one, spring the identical wording in an opposition amendment. Makes the signatories look and feel like foolish lobby fodder (which they are).
ReplyDeleteThis aside, EDMs are a waste of time and money; an expensive way for MPs to congratulate their local football teams.
In case anyone was wondering why our list has 64 MPs,it includes David Taylor, who actually voted in both lobbies- for and against the motion - thereby in effect abstaining. He is therefore not quite as bad as the others, but all of them should really have done the decent thing and voted for the motion.
ReplyDeleteJust out of interest Iain can you give me a few examples of Tories voting against the party line on opposition bills in the Thatcher and Major years?
ReplyDeleteWhatever their views on a matter in terms of a short EDM govt MPs rarely vote for opposition bills which tend to be longer, more complex and are ... opposition bills. The same happens at local government level of course. And in Students Unions. As Red Tamarin suggests your argument doesn't really hold water. It is not the same. These are not mutually exclusive positions.
Like defectors standing for re-election. It almost never happens. So it is with opposition bills.
Anne - Glad to hear that the taxpayer-funded Open U has not had the impertinence to "take a more ethiccal stance according to the Gospel of St Anne". I feel better about the Open U than ever.
ReplyDeleteMmmmmm ... arms dealers.
What's an EDM, by the way? I cannot keep up with all these government initials and think they insult the electorate with them. There are so many that they intentionally give out a forbidding, unknown feel to them, like the old USSR.
you can get a student loan and a bursary too, depending on the course and your circumstances - I got one last year for a PGCE Modern Languages at the age of 52
ReplyDeleteverity - an EDM is an Early Day Motion - a form of Parliamentary petition that has no real power or significance. Only on odd occasions like this when the Opposition adopt the text of an EDM for one of their scheduled debating slots does it get any discussion.
ReplyDeleteAs an acronym it is not new and it has nothing to do with the Government - it has been part of Parliamentary procedure since the early 1940s.
You are welcome to be anti-government, on this blog especially, but you're verging on Godwin's Law territory with your inaccurate and ill-advised reference to Soviet Russia.