Thursday, 7 May 2009

a clanging symbol

this from Mr Salter's Westminster Diary today:

By Wednesday morning, I and a number of other colleagues were sending out emails to three hundred Labour MPs urging them to withhold their support from the Government in the division lobbies later that afternoon unless we were promised a policy rethink. Pressure mounted during the day, not least thanks to the Speaker giving me the opportunity to raise at Prime Minister’s Question Time the appalling prospect of former Gurkha soldiers who did not meet the criteria being deported from Britain. By 2pm the Government’s position was shifting and after intense negotiations we got them to commit to review the policy (yet again!) before the summer recess in July and to promise that there will be no deportations of Gurkhas currently in Britain fighting their cases. At 3pm I addressed several hundred Gurkhas outside Parliament and told them the good news. None of this stopped the Government losing the symbolic vote later that afternoon but it is clear now that we are well on the way to getting justice for Gurkhas at last.

so the vote was only a symbolic one, so it was OK not to vote? Is a symbolic vote like being symbolic naked?


Anonymous said...

Obviously Salter only made symbolic efforts in rallying Labour rebels for the symbolic vote.

Martin S, Reading said...

You don't need to have successfully completed a BA to understand the importance of symbolism.

I've had a political education rather than an education in politics.

Anonymous said...

I don't by this for a moment,the only reason the Govt has now promised a review is PRECISELY because they lost the vote,and totally misread public opinion on the matter.

howard thomas said...

Joanna Lumley for PM??
I can't see this lady abstaining after doing all the right things!

howard thomas said...

What do we think of the ongoing expenses saga Jane?

howard thomas said...

Anonymous-----Prey tell me , when did the government read public opinion correctly ----or even give a toss!