Why have none of the papers run with the headline “63 opposition MPs failed to vote against the Bedroom Tax”?
Today’s papers have been filled with who voted for or against the Labour motion to abolish the proposed “Bedroom tax”.
The Guardian went with “Lib Dem MPs join Labour in voting against bedroom tax”
The Mirror went with “Bedroom Tax: How Tories and Lib Dem MPs voted on the hated coalition policy”
Channel 4 News went with “Government majority cut in ‘bedroom tax’ debate”
All these headlines are true and accurate, but all fail to highlight what I see as the main story here – that 63 opposition MPs failed vote against the Bedroom Tax when the motion was defeated by just 26 (252 to 226)
In other words, if less than half of these opposition MPs had voted for the motion and against the Bedroom Tax the motion would have carried.
So who were these 63 opposition MPs who failed to show? Well, we know that there are 29 MPs who come from smaller parties, which leavers at least 34 Labour. However, we know that all the SNP, Plaid and Green MPs voted for the motion. This means that at least 43 Labour MPs failed to support their own party’s motion.
Would now be a good time reiterate that the motion was only defeated by 26?
Why is this not the headline?
Hynd's Blog 
If those labour MPs who did not vote against the bedroom tax , because they supported it , Then they should stand up and be counted , and let the
people of this country who are suffering because of this unfair tax judge for themselves as to weather these people should be still in their positions when the voting comes arround,They are supposed to be labour MPs with labour values , what a laugh , At least our MP Mr Stephen Twigg was there fighting to get it abolished a true man of the people who always has the decency to reply when you contact him , pity their are not more like him
The other muppets on the none elected govenment fron benchers dont even know what a hard days work is , because they have never done one in their lives, but still have the cheek to critise the unemployed who they call shirkers what a laugh this from 2 failed leaders of the conservitive party who should not even be in charge of a kindergarden , and tweedle dee and tweedle dum who were never even elected by the people of this country , but got together to have a marrige of conveniance .
LikeLike
It was 47 only 5 have been accounted for. Ed balls in america championing the middle classes. D. Alexander at Auchvitz and two saying they were paired and another in Palastine. but what about Margaret Hodgson and Abbott 2 local MPs what was more important.
http://ukgeneralelection2015.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/bedroom-tax-vote-where-were-all-labour.html
all 6 SNP mps voted yet 10 Scottish Labour MPs didn’t
LikeLike
Here is list of MPs who need to sharpen their excuse writing pencils
Abbott, Diane
Abrahams, Debbie
Alexander, Douglas
Ashworth, Jonathan
Balls, Ed
Bayley, Hugh
Blunkett, David
Brown, Gordon
Bryant, Chris
Coffey, Ann
Cunningham, Alex
De Piero, Gloria
Dobbin, Jim
Dobson, Frank
Donohoe, Brian H.
Doran, Frank
Efford, Clive
Field, Frank
Flynn, Paul
Gapes, Mike
Hamilton, David
Hodge, Margaret
Hood, Jim
Hoyle, Lindsay
James, Siân C.
Johnson, Alan
Jowell, Tessa
Kaufman, Gerald
Lammy, David
Lucas, Ian
McDonagh, Siobhain
McKechin, Ann
Meale, Alan
Munn, Meg
Murphy, Jim
Nash, Pamela
Primarolo, Dawn
Sarwar, Anas
Spellar, John
Sutcliffe, Gerry
Umunna, Chuka
Walley, Joan
Watts, Dave
Woodward, Shaun
LikeLike
So far I have a good excuse from Mr Umunna….
LikeLike
> Why is this not the headline?
Because asking this question demonstrates a failure to understand how parliament functions and political leader writers, for all their failings, do tend to have at least basic grasp of parliamentary democracy.
Opposition MPs who “didn’t turn up” were “paired”. This is an arrangement whereby MPs who cannot make a division (such as Chuka Umma, who is in Palestine) are ‘paired’ with an MP who would have voted the opposite way, neither attends and both sides are debited by one, meaning that the difference is the same, just the number of bodies walking through the lobbies reduces.
Parliament has functioned liked this for literally centuries. It is necessary in a parliamentary system where the executive sits in the legislature, otherwise in tight votes Ministers would not be able to attend to business outwith the House itself (i.e. the Prime Minister and other ministers wouldn’t be able attend international events due to the need to attend the Commons; the secretary of defence would never go abroad and so on.).
As Leader of the Opposition Thatcher suspended pairing in an attempt to bring down the Callaghan government. The result was chaos as, for example, the Secretary of Defence had to be helicoptered from Northern Ireland at short notice in order to stop the government falling.
It is not a great system, and it grows out of the cabinet also being in legislature. But it’s the only fix we have while this is the case.
> In other words, if less than half of these opposition MPs had voted for the > motion and against the Bedroom Tax the motion would have carried.
This is objectively untrue. Sorry. But that’s how it is. Had those MPs turned up, their pairs would have turned up to and the result would have been the same. Anyone asserting otherwise is wrong,
LikeLike
It’s not the only fix, a far simpler system would be to allow our MPs to vote online.
LikeLike
Of course the problem we have is we have no idea how many of these MPs were paired off and how many were in constituency or just not about. I tried my hardest before publishing to find information on pairing and there was nothing easy at hand for this vote. I also asked the Lab press office to provide a list but to no avail. So until I get that list….we have to tick them off one at a time.
LikeLike
I think Steve and I both understand the system, but MPs who did not vote need to explain that to their constituents, and probably they only will do that if they are asked. Now at least people who read here will know to ask
LikeLike