Party whips threatened to withdraw “domestic abuse support” if Labour MP voted to lift two-child benefit cap.

[IwantToRetire]

A SUSPENDED Labour MP has claimed that party whips threatened to withdraw her “domestic abuse support” if she voted in favour of lifting the two-child benefit cap.

Apsana Begum, who was among six other Labour MPs suspended for supporting an SNP amendment on the issue, made the claim to various outlets including Times Radio, where she said that she was told before the vote that “support for me as a survivor of domestic abuse was contingent on how I was voting”.

Story continues at https://www.thenational.scot/news/24480054.apsana-begum-claims-labour-whips-threatened-two-child-cap/ and at https://archive.ph/10zz6

So, Apsana Bebum gets certain support from the Labour Party, which is contingent on her being a Labour Party MP? And then because she supported an opposition motion against the government, she gets suspended from the party, and loses that support?

It's a bit of a non-story really.

She's been suspended as a member of the labour party. That means that all support that she gets as being part of that party is removed - that means everything, such as the ability to use data collected by the LP, support from her CLP members etc. She is effectively not a member of the LP

What did she expect?

Are both these comments made after reading the full story?

It is about receiving support as a victim of domestic violence.

Suppporting someone who is a survivor of male violence should not be contingent on whether or not they agree with everything you say.

Are you saying it is standard Labour Party practice that they only support women who have experienced domestic violence if they agree with Labour Party central office. Over 40 Labour MPs did not support the Party line, the majority being too cowardly to actual vote against, but just didn't attend the vote.

But someone who is prepared to stand by her principles has her experience of male violence used to try and pressurise her.

Just how sick is that.

So much for this being a feminist forum.

What completely batshit remarks.

I don't expect support from the Labour Party because I'm not a member of it.

I don't expect support from the Conservative Party because I'm not a member of it.

I don't expect support from my former employer because I don't work there any more.

I wouldn't expect support from a school that I'd been expelled from because they told me to sling my hook.

How many more examples do you want me to give before you understand?

Having read the article I'm still not sure what the whip actually said.

Firstly if they said voting against the gov will mean the whip will be withdrawn that's fine and clear and applied to everyone.

If they headlined on we'll stop your DV support that's wrong.

If they were explaining the full consequences of losing the whip that seems entirely reasonable.
It's a question for the Labour Party whether they actually want to do that.
If Apsana wants to be free to ignore the whipping system she can become an Independent. Personally I think they should stick to their guns because she's going to be a serial rebel. She could have abstained.

I don't understand this. What support? Is she saying the CLP is saying they will move to interfere in her LLP? Because that would be very wrong. I'm not sure what other support they mean in the article. I'm sure she came close to - somehow - being deselected prior to the GE. It also sounds like her ex husband is controlling.

Having dug into this more I'm none the wiser. Is she talking about support for political work on DV, She chairs the APPG. Or extra financial support?.

The Labour Party have said this statement isn't accurate.
She hasn't been treated well in the past. But then neither has Rosie Duffy.

I think this doesn't bode well and is an indicator of the deep misogyny within the party and a ruthlessness that will ignore all dissenting voices (including gender critical). Although I thoroughly disagree with Apsana.

It doesn't say that at all. This story and what she believes is being made into something it isn't for her own egotistic revenge.

They were told to support or abstain generically under the whip or have it removed. That's what happened.

This MP is using something she champions to cause trouble

This is completely confusing. Is it support for her personally regarding an abusive ex? What kind of support? Mental health, counselling, security?

Security should be dealt with by Hoyle's office and the police surely not the Labour Party now she is an MP? If she is affected by stalking then she'd do better to run to the press explaining that the police are not taking enough action than blamng her party. If counselling mental health support then she is on a salary now most of us can only dream off and can pay for it herself.

As others have said OP, nothing to do with being a feminist forum, just baffled at your point? People who lose jobs, lose the job's benefits. There has to a mechanism for party discipline or there would be chaos and it would be like Teresa May's last weeks permanently in parliament. There has to be consequences for not being in the PLP and a half in / half out situation when domestic abuse support is not your employer's responsibility (except support for time off perhaps if necessary for health or court cases and that's a parliament thing not a PLP thing) just makes no sense. Why stop there with that support? What about child care, bereavement support, etc, etc.

I don't think what she can be losing can be that big a thing (the support, not the domestic abuse) because I don't understand what big level of support she might be getting that she could not get elsewhere - like the rest of us do. Or are you suggesting she has lost thousands of pounds on a personal security guard or something? Exactly what is it that you think has been taken away?

This makes no sense. Is she getting support in the sense of protection by the police? If so, I find it highly unlikely - in fact fanciful - that the government would lean on the police to remove her protection or safety monitoring. I doubt the police would listen to any political party about an individual’s circumstances anyway.

And she surely can’t be provided with support or protection by the Labour Party? It’s a political party, not a welfare organisation. They don’t hire therapists or bodyguards.

All she’s missing - until she seeks re-election - is a lanyard for some dull as fuck Labour meeting.

So when Labour MPs vote against self ID I wonder what will happen? As their policy is clear as mud, then how many of them will be caught?

Me too. I think this rigid stance is meant to intimidate other MPs on many other controversial issues, particularly around women's rights. They might allow debate now but they won't allow dissent.

She isn't expelled from the Labour Party. She's suspended.

And even if she had been "expelled" that doesn't mean she should no longer be treated sympathetically by people who are her colleagues.

If you've been expelled then they're not your colleagues. You no longer belong to the same party. But that's a distraction/not the apparent issue.

It's just not clear what the actual story is. Is she being given support personally, by the LP and have they threatened removing it? If yes that's awful. Or were they saying - vote against and we won't support your chosen area? That sounds more in line with regular politics.

I was surprised the whip was removed at this stage. I wonder if this starts to paint Starmer into a corner. He will have to crack down hard on everything if he's started off like this. That being said, I gather voting against the King's Speech is something of a no-no. So maybe it's what's expected.

"Support in Bills you may have around that particular issue?" asks the interviewer. "Yes" replies Ms Begun.

https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1816094045887697006?t=GpJGoEX30YzQ9cJNbFtYGw&s=19

I agree @IwantToRetire .

The context of this rebellion, though, is that it's a vote against the government on the King's Speech. This is setting out the government's agenda for the upcoming parliamentary term. This is something that you should never rebel on, if you want to stay a member of the party in power. If anything, I'm surprised that the MPs involved have been treated so gently...

Yes you're right. I'm on high alert at the moment