Natalie Elphicke is a surprising new member of the Labour benches. Why is she there and what does it mean for Labour and it's internal discipline (formal and informal)?
I find myself really upset that Natalie Elphicke can be admitted to the Labour Party having been an outspoken Tory MP but Diane Abbott can't having worked for Labour for decades against incredible odds and having apologised immediately for one rather stupid letter. Keir Starmer is supposed to be a human rights lawyer - how do these decisions stack up?
A very considered article. I still don’t like the idea of a tent big enough to include far right Tories, even one who once played Lady Bountiful in the housing business. Will she still have the Whip when the election is called or will she join Diane Abbott ?
She has probably five or six months left as an MP, much of which will be the summer recess and then a campaign. I’m a bit queasy about it too, but as you and SB say, in effect it’s little more than a headline and an invite to the end of term do.
Good point on housing and funding social housing in particular. Well off the radar and quite old but obviously she has more to offer than just headlines good or bad.
But it might be enough to give her the benefit of the doubt in a way ex-Tory/ Reform wouldn't , especially if she's looking at moving somewhere like social housing.
Yeah, this doesn't seem like a Damascene conversion, this seems like a petty way of airing her grievances in public. Didn't no less a figure than Enoch Powell once do something similar?
I disagree. We're not football fans wearing the team colours whoever the players/manager are/is.
We're a political party with values and principles. Yes, we need to be non-puritanical about that, but there are and should be limits to that. Otherwise we're not a political party at all.
I find myself really upset that Natalie Elphicke can be admitted to the Labour Party having been an outspoken Tory MP but Diane Abbott can't having worked for Labour for decades against incredible odds and having apologised immediately for one rather stupid letter. Keir Starmer is supposed to be a human rights lawyer - how do these decisions stack up?
A very considered article. I still don’t like the idea of a tent big enough to include far right Tories, even one who once played Lady Bountiful in the housing business. Will she still have the Whip when the election is called or will she join Diane Abbott ?
She has probably five or six months left as an MP, much of which will be the summer recess and then a campaign. I’m a bit queasy about it too, but as you and SB say, in effect it’s little more than a headline and an invite to the end of term do.
Good point on housing and funding social housing in particular. Well off the radar and quite old but obviously she has more to offer than just headlines good or bad.
Yes, agreed. The question will be will that be enough to balance other views that she may still hold that are anathema to Labour.
Is she planning to go back into the housing sector, post election? Might be one reason why it would make sense to join Labour rather than Reform.
I've been wondering whether it's about " ex-Labour MP" looking better on a CV.
Ha! Possibly. Though I think most employers do a basic Google search these days...
But it might be enough to give her the benefit of the doubt in a way ex-Tory/ Reform wouldn't , especially if she's looking at moving somewhere like social housing.
Fair.
Your guess is as good as mine!
Yeah, this doesn't seem like a Damascene conversion, this seems like a petty way of airing her grievances in public. Didn't no less a figure than Enoch Powell once do something similar?
Nice line from Neil but I prefer LBJ’s tent and of course being able to count!
I disagree. We're not football fans wearing the team colours whoever the players/manager are/is.
We're a political party with values and principles. Yes, we need to be non-puritanical about that, but there are and should be limits to that. Otherwise we're not a political party at all.
If they win a landslide there will be lots of views that you or I might consider anathema but that’s politics
Yes and no. I think Kinnock had it right yesterday when he said that even a broad church has walls.