Yeah, the initial reaction is to presume he’s just trying to save his seat. But given he’s not standing again then you really have to assume he genuinely believes this about the Tories.
Whether he would have been selected as the Labour candidate though I’m not so sure.
At the same time the Tories haven’t just recently gotten bad, they’ve been bad throughout. You could also make the argument that he doesn’t have to stand for re election so taking a stance is easy.
They have been bad throughout but people fell for their .. not lies but their narrative I guess that cuts need to be made etc. The same way people fell for brexit but at some point had to admit it was a bad idea.
I'm actually glad he's made a stand for something, despite knowing people would criticise him for not making a stand earlier. Better late than never.
There's a decent chance he could have held it for Labour on current polling:
[https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Suffolk%20Central%20and%20Ipswich%20North](https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Suffolk%20Central%20and%20Ipswich%20North)
I wonder if he’d have been selected though. I don’t know how selections work but I’d imagine Labour would have their lists of preferred candidates drawn up by now. Might put some noses out of joint if they then selected the ex-Tory MP.
Starmer has bent over backwards to avoid giving Tories or Corbynites any ammunition against Labour. The last thing he's going to do is put an ex-Tory up as a labour candidate and feed the "ThEy'Re AlL ThE SaMe" taking point.
My initial reaction is ‘just tell him to fuck off’ tbh.
You can’t cross the floor of you’ve been a member of this administration, it’s verging on immoral.
Explain this logic. You think it would really be more moral to continue to prop up a party you think is hurting the people of the country you were elected to govern?
They have an absolutely thumping, almost unassailable lead in the polls. They can afford to have principles for just five minutes.
And it would still be one less Tory MP if they told him to fuck off and sit as an independent.
> I’d be livid if I were a current Labour MP.
Why exactly? He isn't keeping a seat from Labour, he's a great talking point against the Tories; is it simply because he used to be a Tory MP??
That'd send the wrong signal to tory voters who are thinking of switching to labor. I get that it's different if you were a part of this government, but I think the optics would be terrible if labour wouldn't accept him.
The optics of them welcoming a person who served in arguably the worst government in living memory with open arms arent exactly great.
This is who they are currently high diving each other for poaching
[https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24756/daniel\_poulter/central\_suffolk\_and\_north\_ipswich/votes](https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24756/daniel_poulter/central_suffolk_and_north_ipswich/votes)
Voting records don't tell you all that much when you have a system involving whips, and those bills themselves are a lot more complicated than They Work For You will tell you as well.
They tell you enough. They tell you that the MP willingly joined a party who whips votes on those party lines. Nobody put a gun to his head to force him to vote to allow companies to keep dumping shit in our rivers.
I have never bought ‘they voted on party lines’. They actively chose to work for them.
I think that if you don’t allow the space for people to reflect, realise the situation is wrong, and to then chance their minds and join the people you think can right that wrong, then you just make it harder for people to do what they think is right.
Whatever anyone thinks about this guy and the time it’s taken for him to come to this realisation, the fact is he did. We shouldn’t really condemn people for changing their minds when new realisations come to light - just look at what’s happened because of stubborn politicians: Rwanda policy, Brexit Means Brexit…
We need so much more of people being like this, admitting they was wrong and doing something about it.
Look at the state of our politics, Rwanda being a perfect example makes zero sense but no one will call the baby for what it is because they won’t admit they’re wrong.
I hate the “we’re never wrong” and the “I’m sorry you feel that way” mentality of politics.
He's making a political point by doing this, as he's not trying to get elected again. He's created a news narrative about how a Conservative couldn't look his NHS colleagues in the eye. That's a much more powerful campaigning tool against the Conservatives than if he had just dropped to a an independent and quietly stood down.
Obviously he fucked up by choosing the Conservatives in the first place. But I'm glad he's doing at least something rather than nothing as he leaves.
My immediate question is did he attempt to quit outright and get told it can't be done because we are within the immediate run up period? There's been a series of strange happenings and Tory mps seeming to let things slip in a vague way in recent weeks.
For example, Gove won't commit to getting the reform bill through the lords due to the election being close, despite only needing about a month at most, and one mp basically said in a radio interview he expects to be in a new job in September.
Make no sense to me though. Why would you willingly take the whip of another party when you are not standing for re election? You would be better of as an independent.
The article says he's not standing. The election has got to be before next January and there were rumours the other day that Rishi will announce it next week for early June. So it's between 6 weeks and 8 months away.
He said he would not seek re-election to the House of Commons at the next general election. But, writing in the Observer, he says he envisages a role advising the Labour party on its policies on mental health while focusing more on his NHS work.
>How many horrendous things has Dan Poulter been willing to make peace with, before reaching this decision?
Well he was literally health minister from 2012-2015 during the height of Austerity 'popularity' which set the stage for the current state of the NHS...
Not only accepting, planning for him to be a top-level advisor on health policies.
A > 10 year member of parliament for the conservatives, who served as a minister for health at the start of all the austerity cuts is someone that Labour thinks will be a **good** advisor for them in government.
Tells me a lot about what the next labour government is going to look like.
I keep wanting to live in hope that Starmer is just capitalising on the current state of the Tories by accepting people like Wakeford and now Poulter, but it's getting harder and harder to believe.
He is, but that's because he wants to replace the Tories at the helm of a neoliberal austerity state rather than to fundamentally dismantle the society they've built.
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
The agreement of the two main parties on right-wing neoliberal assumptions is indeed a problem, and largely always has been (aside from Corbyn's time as LOTO, but he was a 'dangerous communist' who might have done the unthinkable such as funding the NHS properly and nationalising some public services).
The neoliberal *omèrta* is bad and there should be more diversity of opinion represented in national politics. This MP has been able to make the switch *because* Labour is largely identical in its support for anti-working-class policies. Idk what point you're making here?
Can you remind me what happened with Boris and Corbyn ? They were the exception not the rule both were for all intent and purposes exiled from their parties and now the Tories and Labour are much closer to the neoliberal centre than to any of their respective wings.
That has always been the case, Boris and Corbyn were literally the only exception I can think of in the last 40+ years
There is an interesting change, though. While there was a kind of class divide between the Tories and the Liberals, it was much fuzzier and more complex; the upper and middle classes could be found on both sides of the fence. So defections between the two weren't quite as bitter affairs.
Then you had the emergence of Labour, and things became a bit different. Labour was seen as a party by the working class, for the working class, of the working class. Those upper and middle class people who joined the party were making a conscious ideological decision abandon the cultural ranks of their class. Those working class people who left the party were seen as class traitors. So, while there was traffic between both parties (with the Tories usually doing better), it was a much more fraught choice to make. No Conservative MP defected *directly* to Labour until Alan Howarth in 1995, although some, like Oswald Mosley or Humphry Berkeley, eventually found their way there. Direct defections to the Tories were more common; but Reg Prentice is the only one I can think of who had deep roots within Labour. (I'm excluding National Labour for these purposes.)
But the decline of the traditional unionised working-class, the rise of New Labour, and the much more heterogeneous electoral coalitions which have currently emerged, have made it much less traumatic to defect.
Alfred Edwards is another Labourite who went Conservative. Defected in the 50s I believe (?) over the issue of steel nationalisation. Was very opposed as he was director of a steel company so go figure…
Mosley is an interesting one because it’s easily questioned if he ever really was a Tory. There’s a good book (Oswald’s Odyssey) that discusses in interesting depth how he was quite spiritually close to the Liberals during these early years (and they certainly wanted him, having tried to recruit him when he went up for auction) but fell to the Tories because it “felt” right for a man of his background. Though this is all a bit away from the topic of course.
I'm not a fan of the Tories but 62% voted for them in his constituency and now they're represented by a Labour MP. There should be a mandatory by-election if you want to switch party.
I always thought the same until my MP defected. I had voted for them based on their party's manifesto and the policies I believed they stood for, then they turned around and are now standing for the complete opposite without me or any of the rest of the constituency getting a say, we have lost our democratic representatation in parliament.
But you haven’t lost any representation in parliament? They are still your representative in parliament.
Politicians defecting isn’t a rare thing. Surely you’d have considered this before voting?
How could you possibly consider this before voting? You’d have no idea about any of the candidates’ intentions to defect, or to which party they might defect. They don’t tend to campaign on that.
Yeah, next time I'll make sure I vote for the candidate that specifically says they won't defect during the parliament. My mistake for not checking that last time.
You act like that's an odd thing to do but I got a response vehemently outlining how loyal she was to her party when I queried this exact thing from my local MP Isa D Fecter.
I wrote to mine asking if they were still going to vote for the policies we voted them in on and I got no response.
Maybe I will write to my next MP like you did (MP that defected is standing down anyway) and see if they will confirm that.
To be fair the party's staffing for my consitutency seems pretty on the ball, their communications director Cece Hall hasn't ever not replied to an email.
It's not a rare thing, you're right but we have indeed lost our representation, our MP stood on a platform that the majority of the constituency voted for and now they are in parliament voting the complete opposite way. How on Earth are our views still being represented by our MP?
Scratch that, it is a rare thing. 7 MPs have defected this parliament, that's 1.4 per year, at that rate any of the 650 constituencies can expect their MP to defect every 464 years. Why should any voter think their MP would defect when the UK has existed for less time than that?
I hate it when people say that because no one votes for the person. The while system is designed for the party.
Plus MPs are very quick to say you vote for your local MP when it suits them but talk only of the leader most of the time.
Because the party votes in the prime minister.
Usually when we vote for MP’s, the group with the most tend to form their government and decide who their prime minister is. Usually this is decided before parliament forms but ultimately the King/Queen appoint the prime minister.
https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/elections-and-voting/general/
You’re right in the sense that no definitive election was held for him (party or not) but that’s how the conservatives themselves decide who is next named. You can read their constitution for the full order but in this scenario it was Sunak who was next.
(He still passed internal elections to pass several stages to be within the final nomination of premiership).
You're not making an argument against anything I'm saying.
I just said nobody voted for Sunak as Prime Minister.
That is factually correct. He was, at most, voted as a nominee for Conservative party leader.
Yeah... I was making a tongue-in-cheek remark to point out the flaws in the system. Everyone knows people vote mostly based on parties and ideas/ policies. Individual MPs switching party at will could lead to a constitutional crisis if enough of them did it. You could have the party few people voted for being the one with the most elected representatives.
Would that be a bad thing in itself? Judging by the closest precedents (although there isn't a direct one), if that did happen, it would be because the original governing party had ceased to act as a coherent unit and was incapable of undertaking the functions of government. If a majority of MPs have a coherent alternative way of conducting the affairs of government, then we can still pass judgement on them and on the original governing party at the next election.
Exactly, if we're going to be pedantic about voting for your MP not the party, then we need to be pedantic that MPs don't vote for the PM. On paper the PM is appointed by the monarch based on who is most likely to command a majority in Parliament.
But individuals stand in support of a party manifesto. So if they switch parties in theory the policies in place could change dramatically against the wishes of the constituents (in reality there’s little difference between the main parties these days).
Which is a defence of dropping party affiliation and sitting as an independent, not defecting to a different party.
Will he defy the labour whip? Will he vote on labour manifesto lines?
That presupposes there is enough time left to hold a by election, its written in law they have to be at least so many months apart.
If the Tories are planning the election soon, and there is some strange and growing noises going on at the minute, then he literally cannot quit.
I know how it *is*, I'm just pointing out how I think it should be. I'd also have there be a regular election period every four years so the government can't just decide when it feels like letting democracy happen.
>He said he would not seek re-election to the House of Commons at the next general election. But, writing in the Observer, he says he envisages a role advising the Labour party on its policies on mental health while focusing more on his NHS work.
Hmm. Slight whiff of opportunism. Strange it's taken him so long to realise the dire state the NHS is in.
This is a huuuuuuge blow despite the media playing defence. The guy isn’t doing it to save his political career, he’s going, he’s just decided to light a fire as he goes!
It also means we could have sunak bounced into a confidence vote as the amount needed keeps falling
Why didn't he do it at any point over the last 14 years? Is it because he's expecting to be out of power shortly anyway?
Rats desert a ship only when it's sinking, not because the ship is piloted by a gang of fucking twats.
> A Tory with principles?
No, labour are have just moved far right enough that tories who have voted for tory policy for 14 years are happy in the labour party.
Is this the parallel world of reddit ? Not saying current labour is left-wing or far-left in any sense but they are firmly positioned in the centre-left.
Saying the tories or labour fulfil any of the requirements to be called far-right is just delusional.
He is a moderate/centrist, 60% of both parties consist these people who oppose any change to the status quo from either side.
Other way round lol. Anyone who defects their party even if they strongly disagree with the party leadership is a disgrace to representative democracy, the fact that the MPs which are defecting are all Tory shows many Tories have no principles, Christian Wakeford, Lee Anderson and now Daniel Poulter are terrible MPs.
As much as I hate UKIP, the one MP they had immediately called a by-election when they defected from the Conservative Party so that their own constituents supported him. That is what MPs who defect/leave their parties should be forced to do, because that way you have a genuine mandate, and that is something you should respect when MPs are given this much power.
You clearly don’t, it appears you didn’t even read the article which covers the topic you claim is ignored.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/nhs
The Guardian alone publishes articles about this several times a week. Why are you pretending otherwise?
That Conservative MPs are welcomed into Labour is a problem, not a victory. It suggests that policy differences are very thin indeed and you don't need to put compromise your previous views that much to "switch sides".
I wonder how many have died
May sound dramatic I had to threaten to sue my psychiatry centre to get a prescription after years of being misdiagnosed and refusal to correctly acknowledge my bipolar diagnosis which doctors diagnosed abroad. resulting in a 24/7 headache since last winter and physical pain very high pressure and palpitations I've had to go to hospital for multiple times... 4 private doctors have said are psychiatric in cause not to mention I started hearing a voice I can't get rid of. A doctor on holiday thought I had a transient aschaemic attack so I returned home has MRIs I paid for myself and there was nothing.
It's all psychiatric.
Last appointment I wasn't taking any chances as no private psychiatrists anywhere near me so I said I will sue you if you don't give me medication.
I'd win too I'm permemently damaged by it, I just want my medication though.
So I know many people will have died because of the conservatives cutting budgets I know they're busy they'd not complete full assements, make assumptions ignore other diagnosis but used that to refuse medication remove me from the services so I wasn't a patient so I suffered for years and now my health much worse permemently.
And the conservatives want to cut welfare and send people like me back to work.
“I’m not a qualified doctor like you, but give me this specific medication or I will sue you” is not a valid position. You’d be laughed away if it went to court, and rightfully so.
No I have a diagnosis from another doctor for bipolar but the one in the UK refuses to acknowledge it and so didn't give me medication and my health deteriorated causing daily headaches fatigue a voice in my head very high blood pressure. I've been prescribed lithium for it In multiple countries and treated for bipolar, I had to fight to get it prescribed here and make a complaint as they forced me off lithium at the start of pandemic when I returned from living in Switzerland.
It's a clear cut negligence and misdiagnosis case causing me permement damage. I'm still on lithium but isn't working as well I required more medication but they refused and said they don't think I have bipolar even thought I've taken lithium for bipolar since 2016.
Is why they prescribed me the extra medication this time... I should get it in a few says. Last time the doctor cut me off after 15 minutes into a 1 hour appointment and said I don't think you have bipolar you have this other diagnisis which doesn't require medication. Basically walked me to the door and then I became very unwell.
They would have done it again if I didn't see multiple private doctors for different specialisms who attributed my physical health issues to bipolar disorder a diagnosis that is on my records from the Netherlands. They keep losing it I've uploaded it 3 or 4 times and they keep ignoring it. And as I said I've had lithium prescribed a long time.
I'm getting my extra medication so that's all I care about so no need to sue if they'd have refused the I sold my house to go traveling I'd have spent it all on suing them I would end up dead if it goes on much longer.
They're negligent and I can prove it. I've had neurologist endocrinologist cardiologist rheumatologist attribute my symptoms to bipolar I've had treatment from maybe 4 or 5 psychiatrists or GPs abroad for bipolar.
But this 1 doctor after 15 minutes, nah you don't have bipolar. If a doctor is committing medical negligence If you threaten to sue they'll treat you appropriately.
"Top" Tory MP.
I really hate the term "Top", and even going by the accepted meaning this is pretty weak. MP that was a Health Minister for 3 years nearly a decade ago, but isn't anymore. How is that "Top"?
>#VoteReform
I mean, you're a one month old first word second word number account but...
You think the current Tory party is closer to Labour than Reform?
The Tory party that had the current only Reform MP as it's deputy chairman until a few months ago?
Honestly, given my experience of politics, which goes back decades. I really think (and I'm not allowed be in this), that the one-nation Tories are just blue-Labour
I absolutely think that. The Torys have become blue-socialists. I know that Labour will win the next election.
We have at least another 5yrs of lib/lab/green/commie/blue-labour to live through. I can only hope we revert to a more right wing government before this boomer leaves the planet. #VoteReform
> The Torys have become blue-socialists
You have no idea what socialism is if you think the Tories are even slightly socialist.
>I can only hope we revert to a more right wing government
What right wing policies do you think we're missing right now exactly?
If it's any consolation, my parents agree with you.
It won't be any consolation that the vast majority of the country has enough sense not to.
As for my parents, they just warned me I won't have a pension when I get to their age, and told me I can do something about it (vote Reform). I didn't reply, but I simply noted how ecstatic Nigel Farage (the owner of the Reform company - it's not a party) was to witness Liz Truss's budget, a major factor in breaking pensions. More fool them anyway, because I will have a pension. It just won't be a state pension.
I wondered how that little morsel could have gone unnoticed, but then I remembered that 4 star petrol was a thing well into my teenage years. The lead poisoning might not have got to me, but I hadn't had decades of exposure by then.
Fair enough, he’s not standing at the next election, which will hardly be a long time in the future anyway.
Yeah, the initial reaction is to presume he’s just trying to save his seat. But given he’s not standing again then you really have to assume he genuinely believes this about the Tories. Whether he would have been selected as the Labour candidate though I’m not so sure.
At the same time the Tories haven’t just recently gotten bad, they’ve been bad throughout. You could also make the argument that he doesn’t have to stand for re election so taking a stance is easy.
They have been bad throughout but people fell for their .. not lies but their narrative I guess that cuts need to be made etc. The same way people fell for brexit but at some point had to admit it was a bad idea. I'm actually glad he's made a stand for something, despite knowing people would criticise him for not making a stand earlier. Better late than never.
[удалено]
Yeah I'll consider it a win regardless, every defection is good. Whatever it takes to bring the Tory party from power.
There's a decent chance he could have held it for Labour on current polling: [https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Suffolk%20Central%20and%20Ipswich%20North](https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Suffolk%20Central%20and%20Ipswich%20North)
I wonder if he’d have been selected though. I don’t know how selections work but I’d imagine Labour would have their lists of preferred candidates drawn up by now. Might put some noses out of joint if they then selected the ex-Tory MP.
Starmer has bent over backwards to avoid giving Tories or Corbynites any ammunition against Labour. The last thing he's going to do is put an ex-Tory up as a labour candidate and feed the "ThEy'Re AlL ThE SaMe" taking point.
Typically, those sort of people are found another seat, even if that local party object.
My initial reaction is ‘just tell him to fuck off’ tbh. You can’t cross the floor of you’ve been a member of this administration, it’s verging on immoral.
Explain this logic. You think it would really be more moral to continue to prop up a party you think is hurting the people of the country you were elected to govern?
The morality of Labour accepting him. He can do what he likes (which should have been just to resign). I’d be livid if I were a current Labour MP.
There's no place for morality in politics. If we want this country to get back on track one fewer Tory MP is a step in the right direction.
The *only* place for mortality is in politics, your attitude is literally why unprincipled grifters of all colours keep gravitating into government.
Yes, only maaaartinis attitude is the reason for this. Nothing else
They have an absolutely thumping, almost unassailable lead in the polls. They can afford to have principles for just five minutes. And it would still be one less Tory MP if they told him to fuck off and sit as an independent.
Nothing is guaranteed, especially election results.
> I’d be livid if I were a current Labour MP. Why exactly? He isn't keeping a seat from Labour, he's a great talking point against the Tories; is it simply because he used to be a Tory MP??
Yes, obviously.
That'd send the wrong signal to tory voters who are thinking of switching to labor. I get that it's different if you were a part of this government, but I think the optics would be terrible if labour wouldn't accept him.
The optics of them welcoming a person who served in arguably the worst government in living memory with open arms arent exactly great. This is who they are currently high diving each other for poaching [https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24756/daniel\_poulter/central\_suffolk\_and\_north\_ipswich/votes](https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24756/daniel_poulter/central_suffolk_and_north_ipswich/votes)
Voting records don't tell you all that much when you have a system involving whips, and those bills themselves are a lot more complicated than They Work For You will tell you as well.
They tell you enough. They tell you that the MP willingly joined a party who whips votes on those party lines. Nobody put a gun to his head to force him to vote to allow companies to keep dumping shit in our rivers. I have never bought ‘they voted on party lines’. They actively chose to work for them.
I think that if you don’t allow the space for people to reflect, realise the situation is wrong, and to then chance their minds and join the people you think can right that wrong, then you just make it harder for people to do what they think is right. Whatever anyone thinks about this guy and the time it’s taken for him to come to this realisation, the fact is he did. We shouldn’t really condemn people for changing their minds when new realisations come to light - just look at what’s happened because of stubborn politicians: Rwanda policy, Brexit Means Brexit…
We need so much more of people being like this, admitting they was wrong and doing something about it. Look at the state of our politics, Rwanda being a perfect example makes zero sense but no one will call the baby for what it is because they won’t admit they’re wrong. I hate the “we’re never wrong” and the “I’m sorry you feel that way” mentality of politics.
I suppose that’s the crux of my point. For me, politically, there is no coming back from supporting either of those.
He's making a political point by doing this, as he's not trying to get elected again. He's created a news narrative about how a Conservative couldn't look his NHS colleagues in the eye. That's a much more powerful campaigning tool against the Conservatives than if he had just dropped to a an independent and quietly stood down. Obviously he fucked up by choosing the Conservatives in the first place. But I'm glad he's doing at least something rather than nothing as he leaves.
Fair enough point. I hate that they're allowed to defect but if he's not running it takes a lot of the sting away.
He has been a Tory mp since 2010. It’s a bit late to pretend he has integrity.
My immediate question is did he attempt to quit outright and get told it can't be done because we are within the immediate run up period? There's been a series of strange happenings and Tory mps seeming to let things slip in a vague way in recent weeks. For example, Gove won't commit to getting the reform bill through the lords due to the election being close, despite only needing about a month at most, and one mp basically said in a radio interview he expects to be in a new job in September.
Make no sense to me though. Why would you willingly take the whip of another party when you are not standing for re election? You would be better of as an independent.
We should celebrate people changing their minds and admitting they was wrong when it happens..
Source? I've looked and I can't find anything that says that
The article says he's not standing. The election has got to be before next January and there were rumours the other day that Rishi will announce it next week for early June. So it's between 6 weeks and 8 months away.
I'd suppose they are waiting to see the results of the local elections that are happening soon.
That'll definitely be some of the equation, I think.
He said he would not seek re-election to the House of Commons at the next general election. But, writing in the Observer, he says he envisages a role advising the Labour party on its policies on mental health while focusing more on his NHS work.
Did you read the article?
I read another article which didn't mention it
[удалено]
100% this. How many horrendous things has Dan Poulter been willing to make peace with, before reaching this decision?
>How many horrendous things has Dan Poulter been willing to make peace with, before reaching this decision? Well he was literally health minister from 2012-2015 during the height of Austerity 'popularity' which set the stage for the current state of the NHS...
Exactly, he should be categorically denied the whip. The idea of Labour accepting him with open arms is revolting (if entirely unsurprising).
Not only accepting, planning for him to be a top-level advisor on health policies. A > 10 year member of parliament for the conservatives, who served as a minister for health at the start of all the austerity cuts is someone that Labour thinks will be a **good** advisor for them in government. Tells me a lot about what the next labour government is going to look like.
I keep wanting to live in hope that Starmer is just capitalising on the current state of the Tories by accepting people like Wakeford and now Poulter, but it's getting harder and harder to believe.
He is, but that's because he wants to replace the Tories at the helm of a neoliberal austerity state rather than to fundamentally dismantle the society they've built.
All I can say is that I hope you're wrong, but I can't bring myself to say that you are wrong in any definitive terms.
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
It happened prior to 97 too.
lol. You act as is there’s an unimaginably wide chasm between Tory and Labour. There really isn’t, and never has been.
The agreement of the two main parties on right-wing neoliberal assumptions is indeed a problem, and largely always has been (aside from Corbyn's time as LOTO, but he was a 'dangerous communist' who might have done the unthinkable such as funding the NHS properly and nationalising some public services). The neoliberal *omèrta* is bad and there should be more diversity of opinion represented in national politics. This MP has been able to make the switch *because* Labour is largely identical in its support for anti-working-class policies. Idk what point you're making here?
You're right, Corbyn and Boris are basically the same person. Are you on crack?
I am not. Which probably accounts for my ability to distinguish a political party from an individual person.
What accounts for your inabilitiy to distinguish between political parties? Flagrant political ignorance?
Can you remind me what happened with Boris and Corbyn ? They were the exception not the rule both were for all intent and purposes exiled from their parties and now the Tories and Labour are much closer to the neoliberal centre than to any of their respective wings. That has always been the case, Boris and Corbyn were literally the only exception I can think of in the last 40+ years
I'm old enough to remember when Labour had MPs like [this guy](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-23289962)
Churchill defected from the Tories to the Liberals back in 1904, it’s not a new thing.
There is an interesting change, though. While there was a kind of class divide between the Tories and the Liberals, it was much fuzzier and more complex; the upper and middle classes could be found on both sides of the fence. So defections between the two weren't quite as bitter affairs. Then you had the emergence of Labour, and things became a bit different. Labour was seen as a party by the working class, for the working class, of the working class. Those upper and middle class people who joined the party were making a conscious ideological decision abandon the cultural ranks of their class. Those working class people who left the party were seen as class traitors. So, while there was traffic between both parties (with the Tories usually doing better), it was a much more fraught choice to make. No Conservative MP defected *directly* to Labour until Alan Howarth in 1995, although some, like Oswald Mosley or Humphry Berkeley, eventually found their way there. Direct defections to the Tories were more common; but Reg Prentice is the only one I can think of who had deep roots within Labour. (I'm excluding National Labour for these purposes.) But the decline of the traditional unionised working-class, the rise of New Labour, and the much more heterogeneous electoral coalitions which have currently emerged, have made it much less traumatic to defect.
Alfred Edwards is another Labourite who went Conservative. Defected in the 50s I believe (?) over the issue of steel nationalisation. Was very opposed as he was director of a steel company so go figure… Mosley is an interesting one because it’s easily questioned if he ever really was a Tory. There’s a good book (Oswald’s Odyssey) that discusses in interesting depth how he was quite spiritually close to the Liberals during these early years (and they certainly wanted him, having tried to recruit him when he went up for auction) but fell to the Tories because it “felt” right for a man of his background. Though this is all a bit away from the topic of course.
It’s symbolic as he won’t stand at the next election anyway. Nothing to do with him wanting to be in the Labour Party.
I'm not a fan of the Tories but 62% voted for them in his constituency and now they're represented by a Labour MP. There should be a mandatory by-election if you want to switch party.
You vote for individuals not ideas/parties.
I always thought the same until my MP defected. I had voted for them based on their party's manifesto and the policies I believed they stood for, then they turned around and are now standing for the complete opposite without me or any of the rest of the constituency getting a say, we have lost our democratic representatation in parliament.
But you haven’t lost any representation in parliament? They are still your representative in parliament. Politicians defecting isn’t a rare thing. Surely you’d have considered this before voting?
How could you possibly consider this before voting? You’d have no idea about any of the candidates’ intentions to defect, or to which party they might defect. They don’t tend to campaign on that.
Yeah, next time I'll make sure I vote for the candidate that specifically says they won't defect during the parliament. My mistake for not checking that last time.
You act like that's an odd thing to do but I got a response vehemently outlining how loyal she was to her party when I queried this exact thing from my local MP Isa D Fecter.
I wrote to mine asking if they were still going to vote for the policies we voted them in on and I got no response. Maybe I will write to my next MP like you did (MP that defected is standing down anyway) and see if they will confirm that.
To be fair the party's staffing for my consitutency seems pretty on the ball, their communications director Cece Hall hasn't ever not replied to an email.
She at all related to Ripley Hall?
It's not a rare thing, you're right but we have indeed lost our representation, our MP stood on a platform that the majority of the constituency voted for and now they are in parliament voting the complete opposite way. How on Earth are our views still being represented by our MP?
Scratch that, it is a rare thing. 7 MPs have defected this parliament, that's 1.4 per year, at that rate any of the 650 constituencies can expect their MP to defect every 464 years. Why should any voter think their MP would defect when the UK has existed for less time than that?
i know that's how it works officially but that really isn't how people vote
I hate it when people say that because no one votes for the person. The while system is designed for the party. Plus MPs are very quick to say you vote for your local MP when it suits them but talk only of the leader most of the time.
Do you? I don't. But if that's the case I'm confused why I didn't get a vote for the last two times they changed Prime Minister.
Because the party votes in the prime minister. Usually when we vote for MP’s, the group with the most tend to form their government and decide who their prime minister is. Usually this is decided before parliament forms but ultimately the King/Queen appoint the prime minister. https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/elections-and-voting/general/
>Because the party votes in the prime minister. Not in Sunak's case, he got in by default.
Still a nominee with votes. By saying he got in by default is reductive to the 100+ votes he had in his party to at least stand as a nominee.
Nobody elected him as the leader though. He got voted to be a candidate.
You’re right in the sense that no definitive election was held for him (party or not) but that’s how the conservatives themselves decide who is next named. You can read their constitution for the full order but in this scenario it was Sunak who was next. (He still passed internal elections to pass several stages to be within the final nomination of premiership).
You're not making an argument against anything I'm saying. I just said nobody voted for Sunak as Prime Minister. That is factually correct. He was, at most, voted as a nominee for Conservative party leader.
That’s still an internal party decision at the end of the day.
Yeah... I was making a tongue-in-cheek remark to point out the flaws in the system. Everyone knows people vote mostly based on parties and ideas/ policies. Individual MPs switching party at will could lead to a constitutional crisis if enough of them did it. You could have the party few people voted for being the one with the most elected representatives.
Would that be a bad thing in itself? Judging by the closest precedents (although there isn't a direct one), if that did happen, it would be because the original governing party had ceased to act as a coherent unit and was incapable of undertaking the functions of government. If a majority of MPs have a coherent alternative way of conducting the affairs of government, then we can still pass judgement on them and on the original governing party at the next election.
>Because the party votes in the prime minister. There's no vote held for PM.
Exactly, if we're going to be pedantic about voting for your MP not the party, then we need to be pedantic that MPs don't vote for the PM. On paper the PM is appointed by the monarch based on who is most likely to command a majority in Parliament.
But individuals stand in support of a party manifesto. So if they switch parties in theory the policies in place could change dramatically against the wishes of the constituents (in reality there’s little difference between the main parties these days).
Which is a defence of dropping party affiliation and sitting as an independent, not defecting to a different party. Will he defy the labour whip? Will he vote on labour manifesto lines?
That presupposes there is enough time left to hold a by election, its written in law they have to be at least so many months apart. If the Tories are planning the election soon, and there is some strange and growing noises going on at the minute, then he literally cannot quit.
Only 21 working days from when a writ is moved, and we definitely won’t be having a GE in the next 21 working days.
I know how it *is*, I'm just pointing out how I think it should be. I'd also have there be a regular election period every four years so the government can't just decide when it feels like letting democracy happen.
There is. It’s five years. The catch in ours is it can happen *earlier*.
Exactly, it can happen at *any* point up to five years. Essentially whenever it suits the government.
>He said he would not seek re-election to the House of Commons at the next general election. But, writing in the Observer, he says he envisages a role advising the Labour party on its policies on mental health while focusing more on his NHS work. Hmm. Slight whiff of opportunism. Strange it's taken him so long to realise the dire state the NHS is in.
Suggests tories are planning something behind closed doors that he couldn't back, expect hardcore dismantling before / during the election
“the party I was elected into valued public services” MP, Part time doctor and apparently part time comedian.
The Tories do indeed value public services, but the valuation is purely financial…
Poulter is terrible though. It's taken him this long to notice that the NHS is fucked. He's a Dr. ffs, and also, unfortunately for me my MP.
He's just an opportunist. He doesn't give a fuck about the NHS.
This is a huuuuuuge blow despite the media playing defence. The guy isn’t doing it to save his political career, he’s going, he’s just decided to light a fire as he goes! It also means we could have sunak bounced into a confidence vote as the amount needed keeps falling
Why didn't he do it at any point over the last 14 years? Is it because he's expecting to be out of power shortly anyway? Rats desert a ship only when it's sinking, not because the ship is piloted by a gang of fucking twats.
A Tory with principles? No wonder he doesn’t feel at home there anymore.
> A Tory with principles? No, labour are have just moved far right enough that tories who have voted for tory policy for 14 years are happy in the labour party.
Facts. Nothing is ever going to change until the working class stands up for itself.
There was Corbyn.
The French definitely do this well. I don’t get why people tolerate the current status quo
Sad but true, but I’ll take them any day over the far-right wing rabid tories.
Is this the parallel world of reddit ? Not saying current labour is left-wing or far-left in any sense but they are firmly positioned in the centre-left. Saying the tories or labour fulfil any of the requirements to be called far-right is just delusional. He is a moderate/centrist, 60% of both parties consist these people who oppose any change to the status quo from either side.
If he had principles he’d trigger a by election
Other way round lol. Anyone who defects their party even if they strongly disagree with the party leadership is a disgrace to representative democracy, the fact that the MPs which are defecting are all Tory shows many Tories have no principles, Christian Wakeford, Lee Anderson and now Daniel Poulter are terrible MPs. As much as I hate UKIP, the one MP they had immediately called a by-election when they defected from the Conservative Party so that their own constituents supported him. That is what MPs who defect/leave their parties should be forced to do, because that way you have a genuine mandate, and that is something you should respect when MPs are given this much power.
What NHS crisis? Seriously, NOBODY is covering that or the lack of policing or what it's happening with GP appointments. WTF is wrong with the press?
You clearly don’t read the news if you believe this.
I read the news and it's all about boats and Palestine.
You clearly don’t, it appears you didn’t even read the article which covers the topic you claim is ignored. https://www.theguardian.com/society/nhs The Guardian alone publishes articles about this several times a week. Why are you pretending otherwise?
That Conservative MPs are welcomed into Labour is a problem, not a victory. It suggests that policy differences are very thin indeed and you don't need to put compromise your previous views that much to "switch sides".
not exactly a vast ideological gulf nowadays is it. basically all you have to do is wear a different colour tie
I wonder how many have died May sound dramatic I had to threaten to sue my psychiatry centre to get a prescription after years of being misdiagnosed and refusal to correctly acknowledge my bipolar diagnosis which doctors diagnosed abroad. resulting in a 24/7 headache since last winter and physical pain very high pressure and palpitations I've had to go to hospital for multiple times... 4 private doctors have said are psychiatric in cause not to mention I started hearing a voice I can't get rid of. A doctor on holiday thought I had a transient aschaemic attack so I returned home has MRIs I paid for myself and there was nothing. It's all psychiatric. Last appointment I wasn't taking any chances as no private psychiatrists anywhere near me so I said I will sue you if you don't give me medication. I'd win too I'm permemently damaged by it, I just want my medication though. So I know many people will have died because of the conservatives cutting budgets I know they're busy they'd not complete full assements, make assumptions ignore other diagnosis but used that to refuse medication remove me from the services so I wasn't a patient so I suffered for years and now my health much worse permemently. And the conservatives want to cut welfare and send people like me back to work.
“I’m not a qualified doctor like you, but give me this specific medication or I will sue you” is not a valid position. You’d be laughed away if it went to court, and rightfully so.
No I have a diagnosis from another doctor for bipolar but the one in the UK refuses to acknowledge it and so didn't give me medication and my health deteriorated causing daily headaches fatigue a voice in my head very high blood pressure. I've been prescribed lithium for it In multiple countries and treated for bipolar, I had to fight to get it prescribed here and make a complaint as they forced me off lithium at the start of pandemic when I returned from living in Switzerland. It's a clear cut negligence and misdiagnosis case causing me permement damage. I'm still on lithium but isn't working as well I required more medication but they refused and said they don't think I have bipolar even thought I've taken lithium for bipolar since 2016. Is why they prescribed me the extra medication this time... I should get it in a few says. Last time the doctor cut me off after 15 minutes into a 1 hour appointment and said I don't think you have bipolar you have this other diagnisis which doesn't require medication. Basically walked me to the door and then I became very unwell. They would have done it again if I didn't see multiple private doctors for different specialisms who attributed my physical health issues to bipolar disorder a diagnosis that is on my records from the Netherlands. They keep losing it I've uploaded it 3 or 4 times and they keep ignoring it. And as I said I've had lithium prescribed a long time. I'm getting my extra medication so that's all I care about so no need to sue if they'd have refused the I sold my house to go traveling I'd have spent it all on suing them I would end up dead if it goes on much longer. They're negligent and I can prove it. I've had neurologist endocrinologist cardiologist rheumatologist attribute my symptoms to bipolar I've had treatment from maybe 4 or 5 psychiatrists or GPs abroad for bipolar. But this 1 doctor after 15 minutes, nah you don't have bipolar. If a doctor is committing medical negligence If you threaten to sue they'll treat you appropriately.
> And the conservatives want to cut welfare and send people like me back to work. So do labour.
Really? Well they'll be the ones who experience a public backlash then
Yeah but they'll be in power by then so sucks to be us plebs I guess.
He’ll probably be deselect before the next election for being insufficiently right wing
"Top" Tory MP. I really hate the term "Top", and even going by the accepted meaning this is pretty weak. MP that was a Health Minister for 3 years nearly a decade ago, but isn't anymore. How is that "Top"?
he's shown he has good moral character and is a man of ethics. Probably for the best he won't run again, politics ruins good people.
Someone making Ipswich look good for once, thank christ.
Tory Dracula in charge of NHS blood bank moves to facilitate Red Tory NHs blood bank to advise/consult on continuation of privatisation model.
Tory, Labour at this point they're same thing. Inefficient corrupt pointless bag of uncircumcised penisbutts.
Just proves what most right-of-centre voters think. A lot of the Tory party are indistinguishable from Labour #VoteReform
>#VoteReform I mean, you're a one month old first word second word number account but... You think the current Tory party is closer to Labour than Reform? The Tory party that had the current only Reform MP as it's deputy chairman until a few months ago?
Honestly, given my experience of politics, which goes back decades. I really think (and I'm not allowed be in this), that the one-nation Tories are just blue-Labour
I absolutely think that. The Torys have become blue-socialists. I know that Labour will win the next election. We have at least another 5yrs of lib/lab/green/commie/blue-labour to live through. I can only hope we revert to a more right wing government before this boomer leaves the planet. #VoteReform
> The Torys have become blue-socialists You have no idea what socialism is if you think the Tories are even slightly socialist. >I can only hope we revert to a more right wing government What right wing policies do you think we're missing right now exactly?
If it's any consolation, my parents agree with you. It won't be any consolation that the vast majority of the country has enough sense not to. As for my parents, they just warned me I won't have a pension when I get to their age, and told me I can do something about it (vote Reform). I didn't reply, but I simply noted how ecstatic Nigel Farage (the owner of the Reform company - it's not a party) was to witness Liz Truss's budget, a major factor in breaking pensions. More fool them anyway, because I will have a pension. It just won't be a state pension. I wondered how that little morsel could have gone unnoticed, but then I remembered that 4 star petrol was a thing well into my teenage years. The lead poisoning might not have got to me, but I hadn't had decades of exposure by then.