Dear Sir
One of the topics of conversation that arises from time to time in Wyre Forest is the subject of whips used by political parties. This is the mechanism whereby parties of all flavours and colours strongly encourage their elected members to vote along party lines to support the policies of their parties. The debate rages as to whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, but when the whip is used correctly, it is good.
People standing for election do so on a manifesto that contains a whole range of policy promises, which they commit to stand by if elected. It is correct, therefore, that the whips make sure that their MP or councillor honours their manifesto pledge when it comes to enacting that legislation and voting on policy. It would be a cheat to the electorate where it otherwise.
However, from time to time we see the whip being used in the wrong way. This is very bad indeed for the general public's trust in politics and politicians. In 2001, Labour promised in their manifesto that they would not introduce university top up fees. However, shortly after winning the 2001 election on that pledge, they introduced legislation to charge university top up fees and whipped their MPs into supporting that Bill, forcing Labour backbenchers to go back on their manifesto pledge. More recently, in the 2005 election, Labour promised a referendum on the EU Constitution. Just recently, they whipped their MPs into voting against that referendum promise.
These two examples are bad enough. But when you look at Labour's latest whipping activities, Gordon Brown must surely have hit rock bottom.
Parliament votes on many issues and a number of them can be matters of conscience. This includes things like abortion and capital punishment. Parliament is now in preparing to debate another of these conscience issue - that of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill.
Essentially, the bill updates the boundaries for research, but within it are three items that are causing many MPs to feel very uncomfortable. These include mixing human DNA with non human DNA for research; creating saviour siblings whereby embryos can be used for spare parts for an ill brother or sister; and finally, removing the requirement for a father in IVF treatment.
Gordon Brown has come under huge pressure from his MPs - including members of his cabinet - to allow a vote of conscience on this controversial bill. Despite digging his heels in, he has performed a partial U-turn on this for political reasons. He started by saying that all Labour MPs would be whipped into supporting the whole Bill, but has since backed down allowing MPs to vote with their conscience on these three controversial points. However, should those points be included in the final bill, all labour MPs will be whipped - forced, possibly against their will - to vote for the whole bill.
This is an utterly incorrect use of the whip and is deplorable in every way. Conservative leader David Cameron has made it absolutely clear that Conservative MPs will be allowed to vote with their conscience on this bill and will not be whipped to voting against their conscience. That is the correct way for parliament to operate.
Mark Garnier
Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman
Wyre Forest Conservatives
Margaret Thatcher House
Kidderminster