The Labour Party leader announced that he would force his front-bench team to vote in favour of a government bill to leave the European Union. Accordingly, he imposed a “three-line whip” for MPs to support the bill in parliament.
Defying the three-line whip is very serious and results in the whip being withdrawn from an MP. This means that the MP is effectively expelled from the party and must sit as an independent in Parliament until the whip is restored.
What do our MPs and leaders do in such a situation?
In the present political culture, they must abide by the party whip without question – be it right or wrong. They do not dare to criticise the whip, let alone defy the order of the party leader. People’s thinking and expectation matter little to them.
Most of the party’s rank and file frequently and unnecessarily laud the party’s top leaders which has given birth to the culture of sycophancy in our politics.
But Tulip Siddiq, eldest daughter of Sheikh Rehana and niece of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, an MP of British parliament, made a difference. Last week she resigned from the shadow cabinet, giving up her front bench seat and opted to sit in the back bench of the Parliament only to speak for people in her constituency.
Holding a post in the shadow cabinet is immensely significant in Westminster. The shadow cabinet is the team of senior spokespeople chosen by the Leader of the Opposition to mirror the government. Members of the shadow cabinet are appointed to take the lead on a specific policy area for their party, and to question and challenge their counterpart in the cabinet-led by the prime minister. It is the shadow cabinet’s responsibility to criticise the policies and actions of the government, as well as offer an alternative programme. In this way, the Official Opposition seeks to present itself as an alternative government-in-waiting.
Members of a shadow cabinet are often but not always appointed to a cabinet post if and when their party gets into government. Tulip was appointed as Shadow Minister for Early Years Education in the shadow cabinet led by the Leader of the Opposition Jeremy Corbyn in October 2016. And she got a front bench seat in the Parliament. Being a first time MP, this was a huge achievement for Tulip.
But the three-line whip imposed by Corbyn changed the situation. The vast majority of Tulip’s constituents last year voted to remain in the EU. And to her, representing the constituents in the parliament was more important than pleasing the party leader. She decided to stand by her constituents, not the party leader in Parliament.
In doing so, she resigned from the shadow cabinet. She did it because, as she said, she could not “reconcile” herself to her position after the shadow cabinet chief imposed a three-line whip for MPs to support the bill. The resignation cost her dearly as she lost her front bench seat and now must sit in the back bench.
She, however, can now speak freely in the House of Commons during the discussion to vote against the bill and represent the sentiment of the people in her constituency.
Can we imagine such an example in our politics?
In 2009, we witnessed a parliamentary stand-off over allocation of some front bench seats in the House. The then outgoing speaker allocated some more front bench seats to the then main opposition MPs. But the ruling party did not accept it. And the new speaker rearranged the seating arrangement by giving the main opposition a few seats in the front bench. Both AL and the main opposition BNP locked horns over the issue.
The fact is that our constitutional provision imposes strict restrictions on MPs to vote against party decision in the Parliament. One will lose his/her membership in Parliament if s/he votes against the party’s decision. According to a High Court verdict, this has made our MPs prisoners of the party.
Unfortunately they blindly support the party line in all issues, not only in casting votes. They think little about the people they represent. Take the example of a discussion on the proposed budget during which the ruling party MPs blindly supported all the proposals while the opposition MPs opposed all of them.
They do not dare oppose the party line, fearing loss of the party high command’s blessing they enjoy in politics.
Tulip, on the other hand, did not seek any favour from the party leader in Parliament. She rose to the present position with her hard work and qualifications. Living in West Hampstead, Tulip has been an active campaigner since she was 16, fighting to save local hospitals, fire stations and post offices. Prior to becoming Labour’s candidate in West Hampstead in the 2015 parliamentary election, Tulip worked for Brunswick Group LLP in corporate social responsibility, working with major British manufacturers and transport companies to strengthen their use of apprenticeship schemes and build links with local communities and schools. She worked for the people who, in return, elected her as MP and sent her to the House of Commons to represent them there.
In her letter to Corbyn, Tulip strongly pronounced that she does not represent the House of Commons in her constituency, rather she represents her constituents in Parliament. Tulip proves that if one works for the public wholeheartedly and sincerely, they know well how to honour such a leader.
Our MPs congratulated Tulip on her election as MP by passing a thanksgiving motion in Parliament in 2015. In the discussion on the motion, they said that they were proud of her. We can only wish that they would all follow her example of how to stand by the people.
The writer is a Senior Reporter, The Daily Star.
