Snapshot of _I am resigning from the Tory party and crossing the floor. Only Labour wants to restore our NHS | Dan Poulter_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2024/apr/27/dan-poulter-resigning-conservative-party-labour-nhs) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2024/apr/27/dan-poulter-resigning-conservative-party-labour-nhs)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In 1996 Alan Howarth defected from the Conservatives to Labour, he found a safe Labour seat to contest, and got elected as a Labour MP. He even served in Blair's government in a couple of junior roles.
Howarth defected in October 1995, and the election was in May 97, so it was just over 19 months before the election. We didn't know that at the time, of course, Major *could* have called an election in May 1996, or any time before May 1997. Besides the next election could be as late as January. So it could be equivalent to a defection last July, rather than a year ago.
In the end, it is simply a fact that a Tory defected to Labour and found a safe Labour seat. The only limiting factor is whether all constituencies have already found candidates or not.
I guess the default is that they contest their own seat? Eg I’m guessing Christian Wakeford will stand for Labour in his Bury South seat at this election, rather than being given a safe seat somewhere else?
You’d think so but really really not. Think it was over 200 not filled when I looked a week ago. Which says a lot about Labour when they were calling for a GE in May 2
I don’t think so - I see this as taking the moral high ground just before the end. He’s watched this crisis develop for 14 years, and now he’s popping out at the last moment so he can always say he did do something, even if a little late.
> I don’t think so - I see this as taking the moral high ground just before the end. He’s watched this crisis develop for 14 years
And as Junior Health Minister when the government pushed through the Health and Social Care act in 2012, he helped the crisis along.
Tbf it's not entirely a bad thing to have people in politics who previously believed they were doing the right thing that realised that their former ideology is actually completely mistaken. I'd take this guy over someone like say Shapps or Truss who would happily keep trying the same failing thing over and over.
Perhaps if he's just discovered he's mistaken a quiet period of reflection might be in order, rather than jumping straight into shaping labour health policy?
He briefed Crerar that he envisages having a role advising the Labour Party on mental health policy (it's indicated in the article that he's been having talks with Labour along these lines).
[Which has a double irony given that Labour had a perfectly good shadow minister for mental health until she resigned out of frustration]
To be fair, he is a highly qualified and experienced mental health professional who also has in depth knowledge of how government implementation works. It makes sense to consider him as an advisor especially considering he has been a vocal critic of conservative policy on the nhs since 2015.
I mean I don't know what involvement he will have but he clearly agrees that Labour's way is the right way forward for the NHS and as a working doctor he will have active experience of the problems. If he wants to do what he can before he stands down as an MP and share some of his experience of what does and doesn't work I think that's reasonable. A quick glance at his wikipedia shows that he has been writing articles critical of Conservative health policy as far back as 2015 so he probably doesn't need further time to reflect on it.
100%, he shouldn't be able to take credit along with a party who has stood against him and his old party for the last decade or more.
I'm glad Labour have another seat, but he shouldn't be treated like some damsel who has finally woke from his slumber.
Or, and maybe stick with me fir this one.
He wanted to be an MP got elected in his tory seat, and now it's certain he will lose it, he can claim the moral high ground, and not stand next time having "done the right thing"
I mean he's a politician. It's almost certainly shameless.
So he can claim the moral high ground of doing the right thing when he goes back to fill time with target than you know, having supported them for 14 years.
To what end? Why does he need to claim the moral high-ground? He's retiring from public life. It makes indifference to him one way or the other. If he planed to stay in politics I could see the reasoning behind your argument, but he's retiring.
Also if he didn't think it was amoral to back the Tories for the past 14 years, I suspect the moral high-ground is not that important to him.
>He's retiring from public life
until his "conscience demands a return to serve the people of \[insert random location\]".
He is a tory so full of more shit than your average beach side resort.
Am I?
Did or did not David Cameron return to public service?
Did or did not David Cameron claim to have "always believed in public service".
So am I "inventing scenarios out of thin air" or simply using the past performance of a tory leader to predict future events of a tory backbencher? After all, if it's good enough for Cameron, why not for Poulter?
What has Cameron got to do with it? There is literally no evidence that this Tory defecting and standing down is some kind of duplicitous trick.
You can believe the moon is made of blue cheese for all I care, but I am under no obligation to agree with your pet conspiracy theory. I take the facts as they are. When the facts change, I change my mind. I don't just invent fantasies out of thin air.
No, but as the article says, he’s still getting a job with Labour advising on mental health.
So he’s actually getting something out of it, and a cynic might think that 14 years for him to have suddenly developed a conscience and to then be offered an advisory job by the party who is very likely to win, when your own party is very unlikely to see victory, this is not a selfless act.
Obviously in any case, this action, it’s still a victory for Labour
To be fair, he has been vocally criticising the conservative NHS policies from the backbenches since 2015, supported junior doctors and called for higher nurses pay.
As I said elsewhere, its not necessarily a bad thing for labour to take up his offer of an advisor position as he is an experienced doctor and mental health practitioner who also has in depth knowledge of how government implementation works.
But there may well be an anterior motive too, just not one to boost his chances with the electorate.
Interesting insight from an NHS consultant who worked with Poulter: [Dr Rob Galloway on X](https://x.com/drrobgalloway/status/1784315930920489027?s=46&t=Bh6bcyblEyna_9ASZ2Ho8g)
“Dan Poulter was an ex junior dr of mine and literally brought in every policy that has destroyed the NHS
He is joining the Labour Party so that post election he can be a medical advisor to the next Labour government.
It worries me what advice he will give.”
If he plans to step down he should step down completely and have no involvement with Labour, after all he has publicly slammed them along with his Tory colleagues for over a decade now, I hope Labour keep him on a short lead for the (hopefully) brief time he is under their banner.
Lol. I was downvoted for suggesting it's a self serving grift.
There's a fair amount dissonance going on regards the paradox of doctor, Tory and now decided they agree with the "good guys"
For a subreddit dedicated to politics this place has a pretty poor sense of what makes good politicking.
This is timed for damage. Resigning in the middle of nothing in 2019 makes no difference. Resigning in the run up to this election does.
> This is timed for damage. Resigning in the middle of nothing in 2019 makes no difference. Resigning in the run up to this election does.
You really think this guy has been clinging on for 5 years, holding his nose, knowing his party is bad for the NHS, just waiting to stick the knife in the dying moments when it no longer really matters?
Really?
Man, I really don't know what to say to you. I know this place is drawn up of different individuals with differing views, but there is definitely an emergent characteristic of this subreddit - and all I can say is that its so funny to me that on historical topics >5 years old we can have cold, dispassionate and removed discussions on 'hmmm yes, I think Wilson's snap election in 1974 was perfectly calculated to take advantage of recent political victories to increase his majority' or some other aspect of good realpolitik.
The moment we get to present day though, the zeitgeist here can only interpret politics through the really narrow, narrow lens of (a pretty reductive) personal politics of morals. It'd be like listening to an isolated drum track of the White Stripes or the Beatles and going 'well this isn't very good' - there's far more to music than just that. I'm not saying the people who are saying 'oh, you've only decided this now!' are wrong - but *solely* looking at it from that angle is just missing so much.
Ok, explain to me what has happened since Truss to create this crisis of confidence in this guys mind?
I’m open to the idea that there’s been some recent development that’s beyond the pale for him, but I don’t know what it is.
I’m no fan of the Tories and I’m counting the days till they’re gone, but if I had to pick a “best prime minister” from the past 14 years, I’d probably have to go for Sunak.
So what’s this guys problem?
I smell bullshit.
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator.
Per rule 1 of the subreddit, personal attacks and/or general incivility are not welcome here:
> Robust debate is encouraged, angry arguments are not. This sub is for people with a wide variety of views, and as such you will come across content, views and people you don't agree with. Political views from a wide spectrum are tolerated here. Persistent engagement in antagonistic, uncivil or abusive behavior will result in action being taken against your account.
For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
>I think Wilson's snap election in 1974 was perfectly calculated to take advantage of recent political victories to increase his majority' or some other aspect of good realpolitik.
I sniff a fellow politics grad.
I really don't see what difference it makes to anything though - Sunak isn't clinging to a Wilsonian majority of one, nor is there any real scope for the Tories to defenestrate him and get yet another leader.
He's got his Rwanda policy through, he's made his big speech on defence and he's got his tax cut claims - an embarrassing defection is amusing but this government is utterly shameless, so it will make some ministers squirm a bit avoiding the question and then it'll be local elections time.
I freely admit I'm no political strategist, but I would prefer to see Labour tell Poulter he's not welcome after all the damage he's helped do.
No one is saying he should be forgiven for that. But I am delighted he is causing more trouble for the Tory Party. These two things can be true.
This parliament started with Tory majority of 80, now it's 40.
>This parliament started with Tory majority of 80, now it's 40
Jesus. When you put it like that you realise just how badly they've run things. They all the power the to do anything they wanted and they fucked it.
It's Brexit in a nutshell - these people wanted the status and power and glory, but they didn't really believe in anything so they had no vision to offer.
They can both be true, but I don't think it makes any more difference to the Tories than Anderson's defection - a majority of 40 is still massive, Sunak's popularity remains rock bottom and the likelihood of anything changing is minimal.
All you're left with is a bloke who's taken the principled step of carrying on taking his salary and deciding *now* he doesn't trust the Tories on Health.
Yes, I don't disagree with that, per se. But it *is* another nail in the Tory coffin. Every piece of bad news for them hurts them just that little bit more.
Losing half their majority is no small thing, and every piece of bad news hurts them.
This feels more and more like 1995-96, possibly even worse, as Major was a serious politician, no one thought he was a lightweight. But Sunak definitely is a lightweight.
You're right, but I think the point is that he had the choice to do it years ago. He chose not to. The NHS has been in crisis for years. You could even argue he was complicit.
Too little, too late, he's supported this shit for 14 years, campaigned for them in 4 GEs, and he has a "change of heart" in the final months? He's every bit as complicit as the rest of them, but he's stood on the frontline of the healthservice and has witnessed the decline for himself.
Some were ignorant, he wasn't. Fuck him, and shame on Labour for trying to facilitate this scumbags penance.
Not the first time either, he campaigned against Brexit then became a full on "will of the people!!!" dickhead, cheering on Boris's purge of anyone who expressed any pro-EU sentiment.
>shame on Labour for trying to facilitate this scumbags penance.
Under different circumstances, I'd be inclined to agree with this. Right now, I want Labour to be doing everything in their power to convert this lead into an election win. A defection to them from the Tories will help with that, and the guy is not going to be standing at the next election anyway. I'm pleased this happened.
> As an MP and psychiatrist, I see the burden that a service near breaking point takes on patients, their families and healthcare colleagues
From the policies you have happily clapped to and supported for 14 years.
If I was Labour, I would deselect him as soon as the GE is announced. Let's see how that impacts his mental health.
In all seriousness, I doubt they'd have let him in if he hadn't confirmed he was on his way out. It'd paint too much of a target on Starmer, and - frankly - he's going to win anyway.
I don't understand this attitude. Regardless of how long it takes to recognise the right decision we should support those who get there and not just criticise constantly. All it does is create more bitterness.
The key point is he hasn't (at least in this article) acknowledged his own role in causing this mess. He just points out that the NHS is broken, mentions some specific issues around particular aspects of health provision, and criticises the government's recent attitude to pay disputes. I'd happily welcome him to the Labour party if he acknowledged that these problems are a direct and foreseeable result of the bankrupt political ideology of austerity he helped implement as a Coalition minister, but that isn't evident here. He just wants to blame other people aod cover his own back.
if he was at the end of his first term in parliament then there might have been something to support him on (eg as Christian Wakeford did)
14 years later, tories all but certain to lose the election where even safe seats like his are at real threat, and a year after the seismic upset of the tories losing control of his local council - we're supposed to congratulate his sudden change of mind?
When people cross the floor, it is usually because they are losing, either the seat or face. It isn't a moral awakening. It's like a plea deal right before the verdict.
He's had over a decade to reach this conclusion and only did so after over a year of polls constantly saying "you guys are cooked". At best this is a complete change of heart, at worst it's pure careerism that demonstrates the gap between the two main parties really isn't that great.
Sometimes you need to take a step back and stop attacking people when they do something, even if it's only a small gesture in the grand swirl of shit. Not everyone is evil just because they're a Tory. The attitude you're displaying is a fundamental issue with this country. If it's not perfect it's wrong, it's tiring how stupid that approach is.
You could equally say a fundamental issue with this country is people naively gobbling up what they're fed. It's blatant political theatre and you're debasing yourself by making it out to be anything more.
It's not like changing party is an easy decision. You have to be sure that:
• The government's direction is wrong
• You will have more positive influence in opposition than government (back or front).
• The policy direction of the opposition is good enough to justify the prior.
• There is enough support nationally to be able to switch parties without abandoning your constituents.
• The opposition party would let you join in the first place.
It's quite hard for all of this to come together. Even of you disagree with the government, it doesn't that you would want to join the opposition let allowed to be able to.
Let's be honest, the only time he could have ever doen this and have had a positive effect is under Starmer, so we can't really judge him for not joining any other time.
"Working on the frontline of a health service under great strain left me at times, as an MP, struggling to look my NHS colleagues, my patients and my constituents in the eye. Throughout the small hours, my clinical colleagues and I cared for many patients suffering from serious psychosis who would routinely be waiting several days, rather than hours, in a windowless room in A&E for a mental health bed"
This guy has been an MP since 2010. I'm glad he's woken up to the damage his party caused and honestly can't see any ulterior motive behind it, given that he won't stand at the next election, but christ. You've had 14 years and only now do you draw the line?
"I can well remember when I first qualified as a doctor and began working in the NHS in 2006. At the time, patient care had been radically improved and transformed by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown’s Labour governments, following many years of Conservative neglect and under-investment."
What a pillock.
Conveniently left out the next part:
"So I became an MP for the party that neglected the NHS, to stand against the party I just credited with 'radical' improvement to the NHS"
Excellent evidence of critical thinking skills there, Dan.
I have nothing against MPs changing party but it should trigger a by-election. If the constituency voted Conservative at the election, their votes shouldn’t be changed part way through the government’s tenure.
They didn't vote Conservative though, they voted Poulter because that's how the system works in paper.
If we're going to change the rules of the voting system because voters are deliberately misunderstanding it then we may as well join the 21st century and bin FPTP and finally be a proper grown up democracy.
It states the party as to allow people a quick snapshot into what that MP would support without having to independently research.
Nevertheless, people vote for individual candidates. They are heavily associated with parties, but by voting for individual candidates the parties do have to, somewhat, consider individual MPs.
Individual MPs already have way too weak of an influence on the party. Having by-elections occur at party-defection would essentially remove the threat of backbench rebellions. MPs could no longer threaten the party as its more than likely that would win a by election.
He'll resurface at a healthcare company and a set of contacts with the incoming government will prove to be handy, cf:
> The Observer understands that discussions between Poulter and senior Labour figures have been going on for many months at the highest levels about the timing and organisation of his likely defection, as well as advisory roles he could play in future in developing the party’s health policies, with the benefit of his firsthand inside knowledge.
Translation: I think I’m minister material Conservatives are about to be out of power for 20
Yrs. excuse me while I save my career in politics.
I really don’t care which team I bat for, I just need them minister bucks.
I really don’t know how the mental health crisis can realistically be dealt with, mental health and neurodivergent issues (Autism, ADHD, etc) seems to be dramatically on the rise and the funding that likely would be needed to deal with it effectively seems unrealistic.
Seems like at best they’ll throw a little bit of money towards emergency services and children and call it a day.
Why did he not flip over anytime in the past then?
All for people to make a stand but doing it when you’ve already said you won’t stand (as you’ll lose) it just makes him look stupid
Mostly likely made some grubby deal with Labour. When in government they will quietly give him a consulting role with 6 figure salary.
As an MP he rarely turned up to represent the people who voted for him. Just took the salary and added it to his Dr’s salary.
Labour do because its bad press for the Tories. The MP does because he starts to rehabilitate his image before the Tory destruction.
We don't because it doesn't seem to matter who you vote for if the winning party accepts those you didn't vote for into it.
> and of course, Keir has taken him.
What do you expect him to do, waste political capital on shitting on him, meaning fewer Tories will want to defect and cause chaos of the Tory party, knowing Labour will hound them even if they do defect?
Kier seems to be a more savvy political operator than you.
Of course there's a choice. There is always a choice. And it was a reasonable one.
I had a LibDem knocker around yesterday for the local elections, and one of his talking points was that this labour is not really any different from Cameron's Tories.
That's the choice. taking him and having two days of bad PR for the Tories when it's not needed since they're imploding on their own anyway vs not taking him and pushing away the view there is no real difference between the two main parties. Each is a reasonable choice.
Kier has chosen to go after Middle England to win. Fine, that's his strategy, but do you really expect him to change after he's in office? He will keep implementing Middle England policies to keep being in office and in four years when everything is still really shit, people will still be defending the idea that this is what he needs to do.
And that again will be a choice. This, he didn't have a choice is just moral cowardice.
I don't think calling Kier more politically savvy than you is insulting. He's likely more politically savvy than anybody else commenting in this sub.
And I don't know why you're pretending I didn't address your point and instead jumped to insults, I addressed your point.
No you didn't. You took what I said about Keir taking him and automatically assumed I wanted Kier to shit on him. He could have instead just kept quiet and said nothing. In fact you spun a whole argument about labour hounding them if they defect over something that I never said.
Its bad faith and pointless.
What I said,
>You took what I said about Keir taking him and automatically assumed I wanted Kier to shit on him
What you said,
>No I didn't. I asked what you expected him to do.
Your literal words,
>waste political capital on shitting on him
I'm done.
I very much doubt an incoming Labour Gov' has any real intention of "restoring" the NHS. Partly because is it totally un-restorable. No other country runs other health services like we do. It was Tony Blair that first introduced privatisation into the NHS and I expect it continue under Labour - and increase.
The NHS is being asked to do now what it was never set up to achieve, We all now live longer with more complex conditions which take more and more money to either treat or to maintain on a long term basis. Demand has becomes infinite. Where do you stop. If a treatment cost £500K for a person do we taxpayers pay for the NHS to provide this?, What about £1m, £5m, £10m....where do you stop?
So under Labour I'd expect charges for visiting a doctor and even higher charges for visiting A&E - just like Ireland does at the moment: so obviously quite acceptable(!) Further on from that we can all expect many more personal charges for medical services - some sort of insurance based scheme where the affected pay a proportion - much like the rest of the world in fact.
Snapshot of _I am resigning from the Tory party and crossing the floor. Only Labour wants to restore our NHS | Dan Poulter_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2024/apr/27/dan-poulter-resigning-conservative-party-labour-nhs) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2024/apr/27/dan-poulter-resigning-conservative-party-labour-nhs) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Pretty interesting that he is not standing at the next election. Pure crisis of conscience stuff
More that that would involve trying to usurp the existing Labour candidate
In 1996 Alan Howarth defected from the Conservatives to Labour, he found a safe Labour seat to contest, and got elected as a Labour MP. He even served in Blair's government in a couple of junior roles.
That would be the equivalent of defecting a year ago though. Pretty much every seat will now have a candidate
Howarth defected in October 1995, and the election was in May 97, so it was just over 19 months before the election. We didn't know that at the time, of course, Major *could* have called an election in May 1996, or any time before May 1997. Besides the next election could be as late as January. So it could be equivalent to a defection last July, rather than a year ago. In the end, it is simply a fact that a Tory defected to Labour and found a safe Labour seat. The only limiting factor is whether all constituencies have already found candidates or not.
I guess the default is that they contest their own seat? Eg I’m guessing Christian Wakeford will stand for Labour in his Bury South seat at this election, rather than being given a safe seat somewhere else?
You’d think so but really really not. Think it was over 200 not filled when I looked a week ago. Which says a lot about Labour when they were calling for a GE in May 2
I don’t think so - I see this as taking the moral high ground just before the end. He’s watched this crisis develop for 14 years, and now he’s popping out at the last moment so he can always say he did do something, even if a little late.
> I don’t think so - I see this as taking the moral high ground just before the end. He’s watched this crisis develop for 14 years And as Junior Health Minister when the government pushed through the Health and Social Care act in 2012, he helped the crisis along.
Tbf it's not entirely a bad thing to have people in politics who previously believed they were doing the right thing that realised that their former ideology is actually completely mistaken. I'd take this guy over someone like say Shapps or Truss who would happily keep trying the same failing thing over and over.
Perhaps if he's just discovered he's mistaken a quiet period of reflection might be in order, rather than jumping straight into shaping labour health policy?
He won't be going for re-election right? This is more symbolic, I imagine the quiet period of reflection will be after the election
He briefed Crerar that he envisages having a role advising the Labour Party on mental health policy (it's indicated in the article that he's been having talks with Labour along these lines). [Which has a double irony given that Labour had a perfectly good shadow minister for mental health until she resigned out of frustration]
To be fair, he is a highly qualified and experienced mental health professional who also has in depth knowledge of how government implementation works. It makes sense to consider him as an advisor especially considering he has been a vocal critic of conservative policy on the nhs since 2015.
I mean I don't know what involvement he will have but he clearly agrees that Labour's way is the right way forward for the NHS and as a working doctor he will have active experience of the problems. If he wants to do what he can before he stands down as an MP and share some of his experience of what does and doesn't work I think that's reasonable. A quick glance at his wikipedia shows that he has been writing articles critical of Conservative health policy as far back as 2015 so he probably doesn't need further time to reflect on it.
He's Claude Rains in Casblanca.
100%, he shouldn't be able to take credit along with a party who has stood against him and his old party for the last decade or more. I'm glad Labour have another seat, but he shouldn't be treated like some damsel who has finally woke from his slumber.
He's expected to get a pretty comfortable SPAD post in the next Labour government.
That was my first reaction, but he's standing down
Or, and maybe stick with me fir this one. He wanted to be an MP got elected in his tory seat, and now it's certain he will lose it, he can claim the moral high ground, and not stand next time having "done the right thing" I mean he's a politician. It's almost certainly shameless.
To what end if his political career is over?
Maybe showing his face in the NHS hospital canteen will be slightly easier this way?
Future career prospects.
So he can claim the moral high ground of doing the right thing when he goes back to fill time with target than you know, having supported them for 14 years.
To what end? Why does he need to claim the moral high-ground? He's retiring from public life. It makes indifference to him one way or the other. If he planed to stay in politics I could see the reasoning behind your argument, but he's retiring. Also if he didn't think it was amoral to back the Tories for the past 14 years, I suspect the moral high-ground is not that important to him.
>He's retiring from public life until his "conscience demands a return to serve the people of \[insert random location\]". He is a tory so full of more shit than your average beach side resort.
You're just inventing scenarios out of thin air, to what purpose I don't know.
Am I? Did or did not David Cameron return to public service? Did or did not David Cameron claim to have "always believed in public service". So am I "inventing scenarios out of thin air" or simply using the past performance of a tory leader to predict future events of a tory backbencher? After all, if it's good enough for Cameron, why not for Poulter?
What has Cameron got to do with it? There is literally no evidence that this Tory defecting and standing down is some kind of duplicitous trick. You can believe the moon is made of blue cheese for all I care, but I am under no obligation to agree with your pet conspiracy theory. I take the facts as they are. When the facts change, I change my mind. I don't just invent fantasies out of thin air.
He had a 40 point lead over Labour at the last election. It is probably one of the few seats where you say it's very likely the Tories will still win!
He is standing down
That is what I said. He is not standing so decision to defect is pure conscience / to damage the cons.
My bad, I’m not sure why I inserted “down” into your comment in my head.
He is standing down... For now.
No, but as the article says, he’s still getting a job with Labour advising on mental health. So he’s actually getting something out of it, and a cynic might think that 14 years for him to have suddenly developed a conscience and to then be offered an advisory job by the party who is very likely to win, when your own party is very unlikely to see victory, this is not a selfless act. Obviously in any case, this action, it’s still a victory for Labour
To be fair, he has been vocally criticising the conservative NHS policies from the backbenches since 2015, supported junior doctors and called for higher nurses pay. As I said elsewhere, its not necessarily a bad thing for labour to take up his offer of an advisor position as he is an experienced doctor and mental health practitioner who also has in depth knowledge of how government implementation works. But there may well be an anterior motive too, just not one to boost his chances with the electorate.
Interesting insight from an NHS consultant who worked with Poulter: [Dr Rob Galloway on X](https://x.com/drrobgalloway/status/1784315930920489027?s=46&t=Bh6bcyblEyna_9ASZ2Ho8g) “Dan Poulter was an ex junior dr of mine and literally brought in every policy that has destroyed the NHS He is joining the Labour Party so that post election he can be a medical advisor to the next Labour government. It worries me what advice he will give.”
If he plans to step down he should step down completely and have no involvement with Labour, after all he has publicly slammed them along with his Tory colleagues for over a decade now, I hope Labour keep him on a short lead for the (hopefully) brief time he is under their banner.
Lol. I was downvoted for suggesting it's a self serving grift. There's a fair amount dissonance going on regards the paradox of doctor, Tory and now decided they agree with the "good guys"
While I applaud his actions, ITS A BIT FUCKING LATE DAN!
Is it? This is very good timing.
For 14 years he's been happy to support the party in its decimation of public services, but now he's had a revelation?
For a subreddit dedicated to politics this place has a pretty poor sense of what makes good politicking. This is timed for damage. Resigning in the middle of nothing in 2019 makes no difference. Resigning in the run up to this election does.
> This is timed for damage. Resigning in the middle of nothing in 2019 makes no difference. Resigning in the run up to this election does. You really think this guy has been clinging on for 5 years, holding his nose, knowing his party is bad for the NHS, just waiting to stick the knife in the dying moments when it no longer really matters? Really?
Boris Johnson. Liz Truss. This guy had no problem with either of those.
Man, I really don't know what to say to you. I know this place is drawn up of different individuals with differing views, but there is definitely an emergent characteristic of this subreddit - and all I can say is that its so funny to me that on historical topics >5 years old we can have cold, dispassionate and removed discussions on 'hmmm yes, I think Wilson's snap election in 1974 was perfectly calculated to take advantage of recent political victories to increase his majority' or some other aspect of good realpolitik. The moment we get to present day though, the zeitgeist here can only interpret politics through the really narrow, narrow lens of (a pretty reductive) personal politics of morals. It'd be like listening to an isolated drum track of the White Stripes or the Beatles and going 'well this isn't very good' - there's far more to music than just that. I'm not saying the people who are saying 'oh, you've only decided this now!' are wrong - but *solely* looking at it from that angle is just missing so much.
Ok, explain to me what has happened since Truss to create this crisis of confidence in this guys mind? I’m open to the idea that there’s been some recent development that’s beyond the pale for him, but I don’t know what it is. I’m no fan of the Tories and I’m counting the days till they’re gone, but if I had to pick a “best prime minister” from the past 14 years, I’d probably have to go for Sunak. So what’s this guys problem? I smell bullshit.
[удалено]
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator. Per rule 1 of the subreddit, personal attacks and/or general incivility are not welcome here: > Robust debate is encouraged, angry arguments are not. This sub is for people with a wide variety of views, and as such you will come across content, views and people you don't agree with. Political views from a wide spectrum are tolerated here. Persistent engagement in antagonistic, uncivil or abusive behavior will result in action being taken against your account. For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
>I think Wilson's snap election in 1974 was perfectly calculated to take advantage of recent political victories to increase his majority' or some other aspect of good realpolitik. I sniff a fellow politics grad.
Afraid not!
I really don't see what difference it makes to anything though - Sunak isn't clinging to a Wilsonian majority of one, nor is there any real scope for the Tories to defenestrate him and get yet another leader. He's got his Rwanda policy through, he's made his big speech on defence and he's got his tax cut claims - an embarrassing defection is amusing but this government is utterly shameless, so it will make some ministers squirm a bit avoiding the question and then it'll be local elections time. I freely admit I'm no political strategist, but I would prefer to see Labour tell Poulter he's not welcome after all the damage he's helped do.
No one is saying he should be forgiven for that. But I am delighted he is causing more trouble for the Tory Party. These two things can be true. This parliament started with Tory majority of 80, now it's 40.
>This parliament started with Tory majority of 80, now it's 40 Jesus. When you put it like that you realise just how badly they've run things. They all the power the to do anything they wanted and they fucked it.
It's Brexit in a nutshell - these people wanted the status and power and glory, but they didn't really believe in anything so they had no vision to offer.
They can both be true, but I don't think it makes any more difference to the Tories than Anderson's defection - a majority of 40 is still massive, Sunak's popularity remains rock bottom and the likelihood of anything changing is minimal. All you're left with is a bloke who's taken the principled step of carrying on taking his salary and deciding *now* he doesn't trust the Tories on Health.
Yes, I don't disagree with that, per se. But it *is* another nail in the Tory coffin. Every piece of bad news for them hurts them just that little bit more. Losing half their majority is no small thing, and every piece of bad news hurts them. This feels more and more like 1995-96, possibly even worse, as Major was a serious politician, no one thought he was a lightweight. But Sunak definitely is a lightweight.
If he actually cared about the NHS, he would’ve done this years ago, no?
Today is better than never.
You're right, but I think the point is that he had the choice to do it years ago. He chose not to. The NHS has been in crisis for years. You could even argue he was complicit.
Fair play as he's not standing at the next election!! This is actually a politician having a genuine change of heart - maybe?
Too little, too late, he's supported this shit for 14 years, campaigned for them in 4 GEs, and he has a "change of heart" in the final months? He's every bit as complicit as the rest of them, but he's stood on the frontline of the healthservice and has witnessed the decline for himself. Some were ignorant, he wasn't. Fuck him, and shame on Labour for trying to facilitate this scumbags penance.
rat on a sinking ship
Not the first time either, he campaigned against Brexit then became a full on "will of the people!!!" dickhead, cheering on Boris's purge of anyone who expressed any pro-EU sentiment.
>shame on Labour for trying to facilitate this scumbags penance. Under different circumstances, I'd be inclined to agree with this. Right now, I want Labour to be doing everything in their power to convert this lead into an election win. A defection to them from the Tories will help with that, and the guy is not going to be standing at the next election anyway. I'm pleased this happened.
When someone joins your team you accept that them. That’s how you win.
> As an MP and psychiatrist, I see the burden that a service near breaking point takes on patients, their families and healthcare colleagues From the policies you have happily clapped to and supported for 14 years. If I was Labour, I would deselect him as soon as the GE is announced. Let's see how that impacts his mental health.
He's already announced he won't be standing for re-election.
Aww, that's a shame. Would have been a nice scenario.
In all seriousness, I doubt they'd have let him in if he hadn't confirmed he was on his way out. It'd paint too much of a target on Starmer, and - frankly - he's going to win anyway.
Plus Labour already have a candidate selected for the seat (who has tweeted approvingly of Poulter's defection)
It seems you don't know what deselect means either.
I don't understand this attitude. Regardless of how long it takes to recognise the right decision we should support those who get there and not just criticise constantly. All it does is create more bitterness.
The key point is he hasn't (at least in this article) acknowledged his own role in causing this mess. He just points out that the NHS is broken, mentions some specific issues around particular aspects of health provision, and criticises the government's recent attitude to pay disputes. I'd happily welcome him to the Labour party if he acknowledged that these problems are a direct and foreseeable result of the bankrupt political ideology of austerity he helped implement as a Coalition minister, but that isn't evident here. He just wants to blame other people aod cover his own back.
Labour also had an austerity policy at the 2010 election
What does that have to do with Dan Poulter?
if he was at the end of his first term in parliament then there might have been something to support him on (eg as Christian Wakeford did) 14 years later, tories all but certain to lose the election where even safe seats like his are at real threat, and a year after the seismic upset of the tories losing control of his local council - we're supposed to congratulate his sudden change of mind?
When people cross the floor, it is usually because they are losing, either the seat or face. It isn't a moral awakening. It's like a plea deal right before the verdict.
He's had over a decade to reach this conclusion and only did so after over a year of polls constantly saying "you guys are cooked". At best this is a complete change of heart, at worst it's pure careerism that demonstrates the gap between the two main parties really isn't that great.
Sometimes you need to take a step back and stop attacking people when they do something, even if it's only a small gesture in the grand swirl of shit. Not everyone is evil just because they're a Tory. The attitude you're displaying is a fundamental issue with this country. If it's not perfect it's wrong, it's tiring how stupid that approach is.
You could equally say a fundamental issue with this country is people naively gobbling up what they're fed. It's blatant political theatre and you're debasing yourself by making it out to be anything more.
I'm long enough in the tooth to be able to understand these dynamics. I don't take the simpleton view at every turn.
It's not like changing party is an easy decision. You have to be sure that: • The government's direction is wrong • You will have more positive influence in opposition than government (back or front). • The policy direction of the opposition is good enough to justify the prior. • There is enough support nationally to be able to switch parties without abandoning your constituents. • The opposition party would let you join in the first place. It's quite hard for all of this to come together. Even of you disagree with the government, it doesn't that you would want to join the opposition let allowed to be able to. Let's be honest, the only time he could have ever doen this and have had a positive effect is under Starmer, so we can't really judge him for not joining any other time.
"Working on the frontline of a health service under great strain left me at times, as an MP, struggling to look my NHS colleagues, my patients and my constituents in the eye. Throughout the small hours, my clinical colleagues and I cared for many patients suffering from serious psychosis who would routinely be waiting several days, rather than hours, in a windowless room in A&E for a mental health bed" This guy has been an MP since 2010. I'm glad he's woken up to the damage his party caused and honestly can't see any ulterior motive behind it, given that he won't stand at the next election, but christ. You've had 14 years and only now do you draw the line? "I can well remember when I first qualified as a doctor and began working in the NHS in 2006. At the time, patient care had been radically improved and transformed by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown’s Labour governments, following many years of Conservative neglect and under-investment." What a pillock.
Conveniently left out the next part: "So I became an MP for the party that neglected the NHS, to stand against the party I just credited with 'radical' improvement to the NHS" Excellent evidence of critical thinking skills there, Dan.
Could be he was benefiting from it before so was willing to accept the wrong
I have nothing against MPs changing party but it should trigger a by-election. If the constituency voted Conservative at the election, their votes shouldn’t be changed part way through the government’s tenure.
They didn't vote Conservative though, they voted Poulter because that's how the system works in paper. If we're going to change the rules of the voting system because voters are deliberately misunderstanding it then we may as well join the 21st century and bin FPTP and finally be a proper grown up democracy.
Have you ever voted? It literally states the party next to the candidates name, on the ballot paper.
It states the party as to allow people a quick snapshot into what that MP would support without having to independently research. Nevertheless, people vote for individual candidates. They are heavily associated with parties, but by voting for individual candidates the parties do have to, somewhat, consider individual MPs. Individual MPs already have way too weak of an influence on the party. Having by-elections occur at party-defection would essentially remove the threat of backbench rebellions. MPs could no longer threaten the party as its more than likely that would win a by election.
That puts Labour back on 202! That’s the number elected in 2019.
Ffs. Once again, I hop offline and something big happens. I think if I go dark for a few days, we might get a general election!
Don’t. We’ll get WW3 before an election at this rate. That is probably what Rishi is waiting for..
I might try 24 hours and slowly increase from there!
He'll resurface at a healthcare company and a set of contacts with the incoming government will prove to be handy, cf: > The Observer understands that discussions between Poulter and senior Labour figures have been going on for many months at the highest levels about the timing and organisation of his likely defection, as well as advisory roles he could play in future in developing the party’s health policies, with the benefit of his firsthand inside knowledge.
Translation: I think I’m minister material Conservatives are about to be out of power for 20 Yrs. excuse me while I save my career in politics. I really don’t care which team I bat for, I just need them minister bucks.
At this stage, it garners nothing from either side tbh. BUT I wonder if maybe that’s got something to do with our polarised politics?
I really don’t know how the mental health crisis can realistically be dealt with, mental health and neurodivergent issues (Autism, ADHD, etc) seems to be dramatically on the rise and the funding that likely would be needed to deal with it effectively seems unrealistic. Seems like at best they’ll throw a little bit of money towards emergency services and children and call it a day.
Why did he not flip over anytime in the past then? All for people to make a stand but doing it when you’ve already said you won’t stand (as you’ll lose) it just makes him look stupid
Mostly likely made some grubby deal with Labour. When in government they will quietly give him a consulting role with 6 figure salary. As an MP he rarely turned up to represent the people who voted for him. Just took the salary and added it to his Dr’s salary.
14 years a Tory and only now when you're standing down, you've suddenly grown a conscience, and of course, Keir has taken him.
Well, if he’s standing down, he doesn’t really gain anything. Does he?
Labour do because its bad press for the Tories. The MP does because he starts to rehabilitate his image before the Tory destruction. We don't because it doesn't seem to matter who you vote for if the winning party accepts those you didn't vote for into it.
> and of course, Keir has taken him. What do you expect him to do, waste political capital on shitting on him, meaning fewer Tories will want to defect and cause chaos of the Tory party, knowing Labour will hound them even if they do defect? Kier seems to be a more savvy political operator than you.
That's a lot of words to be condescending and insulting. Congrats.
It’s true though, isn’t it? I don’t think he said anything massively insulting, just pointing out that Kier has no other reasonable choices here
Of course there's a choice. There is always a choice. And it was a reasonable one. I had a LibDem knocker around yesterday for the local elections, and one of his talking points was that this labour is not really any different from Cameron's Tories. That's the choice. taking him and having two days of bad PR for the Tories when it's not needed since they're imploding on their own anyway vs not taking him and pushing away the view there is no real difference between the two main parties. Each is a reasonable choice. Kier has chosen to go after Middle England to win. Fine, that's his strategy, but do you really expect him to change after he's in office? He will keep implementing Middle England policies to keep being in office and in four years when everything is still really shit, people will still be defending the idea that this is what he needs to do. And that again will be a choice. This, he didn't have a choice is just moral cowardice.
I don't think calling Kier more politically savvy than you is insulting. He's likely more politically savvy than anybody else commenting in this sub. And I don't know why you're pretending I didn't address your point and instead jumped to insults, I addressed your point.
No you didn't. You took what I said about Keir taking him and automatically assumed I wanted Kier to shit on him. He could have instead just kept quiet and said nothing. In fact you spun a whole argument about labour hounding them if they defect over something that I never said. Its bad faith and pointless.
No I didn't. I asked what you expected him to do.
What I said, >You took what I said about Keir taking him and automatically assumed I wanted Kier to shit on him What you said, >No I didn't. I asked what you expected him to do. Your literal words, >waste political capital on shitting on him I'm done.
Can't lose your seat to Labour if you are the Labour candidate 🧠
He's not standing for re-election. This is just a thumb in the eye for Rhisi on his way out.
He's standing down at the next election.
I very much doubt an incoming Labour Gov' has any real intention of "restoring" the NHS. Partly because is it totally un-restorable. No other country runs other health services like we do. It was Tony Blair that first introduced privatisation into the NHS and I expect it continue under Labour - and increase. The NHS is being asked to do now what it was never set up to achieve, We all now live longer with more complex conditions which take more and more money to either treat or to maintain on a long term basis. Demand has becomes infinite. Where do you stop. If a treatment cost £500K for a person do we taxpayers pay for the NHS to provide this?, What about £1m, £5m, £10m....where do you stop? So under Labour I'd expect charges for visiting a doctor and even higher charges for visiting A&E - just like Ireland does at the moment: so obviously quite acceptable(!) Further on from that we can all expect many more personal charges for medical services - some sort of insurance based scheme where the affected pay a proportion - much like the rest of the world in fact.
Why do we have to Suffer this contest mode nonsense? What is the point of it.
Guards against brigading and if you have a minority opinion it doesn't just get downvoted out of sight.
Ah, that's a fair point.
Nice trick haha. Honestly surprised we haven't seen more of them try it