News | Politics Diane Abbott set to take up 'Mother of the House' role in Parliament

[IwantToRetire]

(And no doubt the Speaker will somehow still fail to see that she has indicated she wants to speak. Wasn't it over 30 times she indicated she wanted to be recognised.)

Ms Abbott will become Mother of the House in the new parliament, a role given to the longest continuously serving female member of parliament. The previous holder was Harriet Harman, who stepped down at this election.

Ms Abbott’s election to Parliament in 1987 was historic as she was the first black woman to win a seat in the House of Commons.
The mirror role of Father of the House goes to the longest continuously serving male MP. Some thought Jeremy Corbyn, Ms Abbott’s long-term political ally who re-took his seat of Islington North as an independent on Thursday night, might be afforded the role. However, Conservative MP Sir Edward Leigh will have the honour.

While Mr Corbyn and Sir Edward both entered the Commons at the 1983 election, Sir Edward pips Mr Corbyn because he was sworn in as a member before him. Sir Edward was 20 places ahead of Mr Corbyn in the queue for the Commons’ swearing in ceremony at the beginning of the 1983 parliament.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/diane-abbott-mother-of-the-house-hackney-north-election-parliament-b1168972.html

Good for her, she has never had the respect she is due.

Excellent news. Maybe people in the party will start to show her a little respect. Lindsay Hoyle owes her a public apology.
And all the commotion about Jess Phillips count being disrupted, well I'd have some sympathy if motormouth Phillips had shown any compassion for her fellow MP. If you turn a blind eye to abuse don't be surprised when it comes for you.

.

I'm glad she's getting this recognition, she's been a trailblazer her whole life and has worked so hard for her constituents over a long and dedicated career. It's about time she got some respect from the establishment.

Too cowardly to take a stand and be a support when needing, now Starmer goes all smarmy and virtuous over Diane Abbott.

Addressing the Commons for the first time as Prime Minister, Starmer said: "I hope you will not begrudge me for a slight departure from convention.

"To also pay tribute to the new Mother of the House, Diane Abbott who has done so much in her career over so many years to fight for a Parliament that truly represents modern Britain. We welcome her back to her place."

https://www.gbnews.com/politics/keir-starmer-parliament-diane-abbott

Not forgetting the very personally biased Speaker, Lindsay Hoyle, who refused to recognise Diane Abbott over 20 times during a debate, has been re-elected Speaker.

So I dont think this is the start of a "new" politics. This is just same old political hypocrasy.

Diane Abbott makes teary ‘Mother of the House’ speech after winning fight to be an MP

She seems to be more forgiving of Labour back stabbings and the Speaker who snubbed her than I am / would be.

Good news! She deserves this recognition. No doubt there'll be plenty of arseholes with something to.say, but she's had to become used to that, unfortunately

I'm sure there was a much longer thread about the situation between Diane Abbott and the Labour Party but cant seem to find it.

So am adding links here to an interview from today with Diane Abbot about being a political survivor. Both in the interview and then newsnight commentators dont seem that taken with Labour spin on what happened.

First item on this episode of newsnight https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m002337f/newsnight-diane-abbott-political-survivor

And for anyone who wants something longer there is an extended version of the interview on iPlayer https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0023htq/the-interview-decisionmakers-10-diane-abbott-political-survival

She may not be respected by Starmer who tried to oust her, but she's respected by her constituents. I have nothing but admiration for the dignity she's shown in the face of such bad treatment.

This is the woman who wrote that Jews, travellers, gypsies etc did not suffer racism, but only prejudice, since they are white. She apologised -ish - on TV yesterday but still didn't seem to think she should have been investigated. I am not sure I want her as Mother of the House (but I know it's seniority so WTF).

Well, she's technically correct, and definitions are important, because accusations are bandied about freely.

Please point us to the perfect MP who passes the purity test, AFAIK they've all fucked up at some point.

Makes me proud that our parliament is more representative of the British people than ever before. Now they need to crack on and pass legislation that benefits the people.

I am not sure I want her as Mother of the House (but I know it's seniority so WTF).

That's the topic of when the thread was first started.

I just added this new interview as it is revealing.

And as you will see, if you watched it on newsnight, the commentators whilst condeming her, said that the way the Labour Party responded was not in line with how they have treated others.

That is the main point.

That Labour despite is pantomime performance of virtue in fact just exploits genuine issues to target those who dont toe the line, eg not just Diane Abbott but also Jewish members who are anti Zionist and women who do not accept TWAW.

I was releaved, as sometimes I think I have been over reacting, but apparently Starmer's personal credibility is now shockingly low.

Funny thing is I usually say he looks as vacuous and uncredible as a shop front manniquin, and it turns out that is exactly what he is.

There's a current thread about just how value free the Labour Party leadership is
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5167957-labour-is-betraying-women

Just curious. Are you saying Abbott is correct in saying Jews, travellers, gypsies etc don't suffer racism because they are white? That they only suffer prejudice?

Just curious. Are you saying Abbott is correct in saying Jews, travellers, gypsies etc don't suffer racism because they are white? That they only suffer prejudice?

No but I am saying that pompous ruling class white people who know FA about experiencing discrimination cant go round abusing their priviledge to lay down the law about how people because of their actual race have experience discrimination should talk about it.

It would be far more instructive for the communities themselves to discuss what they would want. And may well not agree.

Anybody who presumes because that are part of the dominant culture they can dictate on this should actually stay silent and listen and learn.

This weaponising of issues like this is nearly always because someone thinks they know better and can virtue signal that.

And as a country dominated by people who have never experienced that sort of discrimination, and in setting themselves up to confront racism, but have failed miserably, I would suggest that rather than scoring points about who is the most virtuous, that they look at the total failure they have made in presuming to know how to create a country that is free of racism, and other forms of discrimination.

Just as women do not accept the dominant sex class claiming they know about women's experience as they have been failed by the dominant male culture to get anywhere near ending imbeddded sexism and misogyny in society.

And as this is so accurately depicted by the Labour Party, and the threads about DA are about her treatment by the Labour Party, I think it should all give us pause to think that weaponising what is the lived experience of minority communities to score points is about the lowest form of political activity.

So do people on this board fall into the category of ‘pompous, ruling class white people’? Or if anyone on here happens to be Jewish or from a traveller background, are they allowed to discuss Abbott’s views on this or not?

I think it’s similar to TRAs in that any discussion seems to be viewed as ‘weaponising’.

None of this is to discount everything Abbott has achieved. I do wish she would show some recognition of the hurt views such as hers can cause though. But then, I wish that about a lot of people in power.

lay down the law about how people because of their actual race have experience discrimination should talk about it.
Is that not what Diane Abbot is doing though?

I've got a lot of respect for Diane Abbott, but I wish she'd find a place outside of the hedge fund owned Labour Party, for her own well-being.

To say that only the communities who experience racism can discuss their needs is to muzzle most of the population under a 'no debate' gag. I remember how Lord Sewell was vilified when his report said that the problem was not systemic racism - which could not be defined and of which he found little trace - but class, poverty, aspiration etc which affected outcomes for people, and that racism was not the root cause.
We have forgotten, in our embrace of identity, that class is a greater indication of outcome than race. Rishi Sunak has risen because of his social class. His parents were doctors and pharmacists and he went to private schools. His family culture matters because he is a Hindu and Hindus tend as a group to value education and the promotion of the welfare of their family. They also have strong family ties of marriage and kinship, which give a web of support to everyone, with an emphasis on rising in professions and achieving economic security.

Racism is not endemic in UK society. There are pockets, but it is neither systemic nor systematic, unless in 'affirmative action', which does discriminate in favour of race - the victims of this racism are white (but apparently that's ok?).
Abbott has worked hard and done well. She needs to admit that she has not understood how others than herself have experienced racism. As for the Labour Party they are misogynistic (which impacts on Abbott and also Duffield) and also anti-Semitic and some support terrorist organisations.

She is. She is saying that only black people experience racism, and other people should check their privilege.

Mazel Tov Diane!

It's notoriously difficult to signal sarcasm or irony in posts, but I'm assuming that the idea of Jewish and Irish people 'checking their privilege' in the UK is deeply sarcastic? And you are just clarifying that that's what DA did?

There are undeniable differences of experience between Black people and [I'll stick to what I know personally] Irish people, but looking at the historical sweep of Irish experience in/with the UK, 'privilege' is not the first word that springs to mind. 'Racism was the relevant term historically, but I agree with Diane Abbott that currently it should be restricted to the Black+ experience.

That doesn't make everybody else equally privileged. Society is more complicated than that, and I didn't like DA's dismissal of other people's experience with her notorious red-hair comparison.

It was sad that a public representative displayed such a limited understanding of the society she represents. Her apology was welcome, but when an intelligent, experienced person in a position of authority says something like that, you can't help wondering how they even thought it in the first place, let alone writing it down, even in a first draft.

Indeed, it was irony. How not?
I do not agree that racism only applies to black people. Racism is a form of 'othering' so that anyone can experience racism and anyone can be racist. I find DA racist in her statement that Jews, Roma (6M Jews were gassed by the Nazis, and c.2M Roma) experienced 'prejudice' and that only black people experience racism so deeply racist I can hardly find the words to express how it makes me feel. Disgust, perhaps, or horror, or disbelief that anyone could be so crass.
I have, being part of a mixed-marriage, experienced visceral racism as a white woman, and casual racism for the same reason (try being on the end of 'why aren't you like other white women?' i.e. not practically a prostitute?).
I also have an Irish surname. My parents could find nowhere to live in London because of that and that they had a small child in tow. My father, who did not consider himself Irish having been abandoned by his mother and brought up by adoptive parents in England, railed against the prejudice his surname heaped upon him. It was racist. I am not having it that only black people experience this. Not irony.