Vote cop-out suggests MPs put politics before people in need
FOR all the talk of ‘levelling up the North’ – whatever that means, it seems not even our local MPs are prepared to stand up for their most vulnerable constituents.
This week in Parliament, Labour put forward a proposal which would have seen the £20 a week Universal Credit increase introduced during the early phases of the pandemic made permanent beyond
April.
For a Government which is supposedly passionate about supporting the most vulnerable in society, and claims to be paying special attention to the North (it’s only thanks to changes in Northern voting habits in 2019 that Boris Johnson is inside 10 Downing Street at all), this should have been a no-brainer.
There are about 5,000 households in Rossendale relying on Universal Credit – around 10 per cent.
Other data suggests 11 per cent of households are in fuel poverty – meaning they essentially can’t pay to heat their homes – and Lancashire County Council’s data says that the borough has a high level of ‘workless households’ – ones with no-one employed living in them.
These data points should have meant that Jake Berry, the MP for Rossendale and Darwen, and Sara Britcliffe, the MP for Hyndburn and Haslingden, should have been right alongside any efforts to provide further support to the most vulnerable in their constituencies.
Both have repeatedly made public claims saying the Government should be doing more to help people in the North who have suffered as a result of the pandemic.
But when push came to shove, neither voted in favour of Labour’s proposal.
As it happens, the vote was non-binding, so largely symbolic.
The Government doesn’t have to pay any attention to the vote.
Yet the decision by both to sit on the sidelines raises many questions.
If you believe the Westminster whispers, the Government allowed its MPs to abstain, rather than vote against the motion, because they didn’t want a repeat of last year’s fiasco when Tory MPs, including ours, effectively voted against extending free school meals for vulnerable children during holiday periods.
But refusing to take part in a vote is almost as bad as voting against.
It’s a cop- out, it suggests a prioritisation of playing politics ahead of standing up for people in the borough who need help the most.
By abstaining, they are saying to the people who are relying on the extra £20 a week that their situation isn’t really so important to them as to express a view or opinion.
It’s sad to see an MP who has barely been in parliament for a year, like Ms Britcliffe, take this position.
It’s even more sad to see a veteran of a decade in Parliament, in Mr Berry, who has courted national TV time as the head of the ‘Northern Research Group’, supposedly standing up for the interests of the North, failing to take the opportunity to stand up for the North.
The beauty of the phrase ‘levelling up the North’ is that it essentially sounds good but commits to nothing.
Mr Berry was fond of the phrase during the 2019 election.
Now, having twice failed to support the most vulnerable in parliamentary votes, maybe he, and Ms Britcliffe, can explain exactly what they meant when they promised to level up the North?