Wednesday, 7 March 2012

Please could you help?

This blogpost is me asking for help.

The reason I'm asking for help is because I've failed. I've been unable to gather enough support to get an emergency motion on the Welfare Reform Bill (WRB) submitted to conference. This is entirely my fault - I should have started gathering support for the motion well before the crucial vote in the Commons on the Lords' amendments to the bill. But instead I was too optimistic and failed to start trying to gather support until all hope of parliament stopping it was gone. And that meant that there simply wasn't enough time to gather the required number of signatures from voting representatives - certainly not for someone with my limited connections. And this is my failure and I am deeply sorry for it.

So now I need to ask other people for help and I hope that everyone reading this will forward it on to everyone they know who might be able to help.

I am desperately looking for a Lib Dem voting rep who is going to be at Lib Dem spring conference this weekend who objects to the WRB and who's willing to do something about it.

Basically, I think that the WRB is such a mammoth issue that, at the very least, conference should have the opportunity to show how it feels on the issue. The best opportunity for this is for the report by the parliamentary to be subjected to a vote on whether to accept it or not and the mini-debate that goes with it. This requires a voting rep to request, by 5pm on saturday, that the PLDP report be rejected. I'd do it myself but I'm not a voting rep and, because the deadline for emergency substitutions is the 31st of Jan (before the crucial commons vote on the WRB) there's no way I'll be able to do it.

So what I'm asking is for a voting rep to request the rejection of the section of the PLDP report dealing with the WRB and to read out a pre-written statement setting forth the arguments why it should be rejected - this would also require being in the conference hall by 9am on Sunday.

Please, is there anyone willing to do this? In all probability the vote will be lost anyway but I just can't think it right that a bill with such a large impact should be passed into law without even a token vote for conference to show what it thinks. If you have any doubt about the importance of this then I suggest that all you need to do is to read this moving account of the impact it will have to appreciate the devastation that this bill will inflict on thousands of vulnerable people.

So please, if you're a voting rep who'd be willing to do this then please send me a facebook message. My facebook profile can be found here.Thank you.

EDIT: To clarify, there are two PLDP reports, one from the Commons, one from the Lords. What I'm hoping to get rejected are one section of the Lords report and the entirety of the Commons. This is because the Lords give a dedicated section to the WRB while the Commons report doesn't even mention it at all.

5 comments:

  1. Good Luck G., you really are one of the few rays of light to be seen in these dark days:

    Denn die einen sind im Dunkeln
    Und die andern sind im Licht
    Und man siehet die im Lichte
    Die im Dunkeln sieht man nicht


    B. Brecht.

    ReplyDelete
  2. George,

    You might wish to make clear which of the Parliamentary reports you seek to have rejected, remembering that there is one for the Commons and one for the Lords...

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's one section of the Lords report and the entirety of the Commons. This is because the Lords gave a dedicated section to it while the Commons didn't mention it at all.

    I'll update the article to make this clear.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm not a voting rep, sadly, but I think you are right to try to make this point.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm not a voting rep any more either, I'm afraid, but I wish you luck with this. I've forwarded the link to someone who might be interested.

    ReplyDelete

I'm indebted to Birkdale Focus for the following choice of words:

I am happy to address most contributions, even the drunken ones if they are coherent, but I am not going to engage with negative sniping from those who do not have the guts to add their names or a consistent on-line identity to their comments. Such postings will not be published.

Anonymous comments with a constructive contribution to make to the discussion, even if it is critical will continue to be posted. Libellous comments or remarks I think may be libellous will not be published.

I will also not tolerate personation so please do not add comments in the name of real people unless you are that person. If you do not like these rules then start your own blog.

Oh, and if you persist in repeating yourself despite the fact I have addressed your point I may get bored and reject your comment.

The views expressed in comments are those of the poster, not me.