As a politician, you expect criticism and scrutiny. It comes with the territory, and I both expect and welcome it.
It makes me a better representative of my constituents to have to defend the decisions I make, my voting record and my actions.
Often, constituents make me think about issues differently, and might shift the way I deal with things and vote.
I see it this way: I have over 70,000 employers and I’m responsible to them. That is not to say I won't disagree with people in my constituency, but it does mean that they can expect an explanation from me, be that via newspaper columns like this, social media, in the Commons Chamber or in person.
Ultimately, my constituents get to decide whether I’ve represented them adequately every 5 years, or whenever there is an election.
With the vote on Tuesday, we are about to go into another election and it is, once again a chance for my employers to decide if I’ve done a good job. Every MP should welcome that scrutiny, because that ability to replace your representative is the backbone of democracy.
From the first day I became an MP, in June 2017, I have aimed to be as open as possible, using all these communications channels to explain both the processes of Parliament and the decisions I make. That is sometimes difficult, because Parliament is deliberately complex and full of old fashioned procedures and rules, which make it hard to understand the political decisions that people are making.
So the arguments and discussions are par for the course in this job. But one thing that is frustrating is when you are misrepresented. With the rise of social media – which I see overall as a good thing, meaning more people have a platform to air their views – it is easy, not only to misrepresent someone, but for it to spread like wildfire.
The Brexit issue has divided the country and that is clearly reflected across society and online. There has also been a lot of misinformation – on both sides of the argument. But one big misrepresentation has been the conflation of a ‘no deal’ Brexit with Brexit (or leaving the EU) as a whole.
So, in our Labour manifesto of 2017, the Labour Party pledged to respect the result of the referendum, which was to leave the European Union, while at the same time committing to oppose a damaging ‘no deal’ Brexit and a Tory deal that would sell out workers and environmental standards. Some people have jumped on that, especially on social media, to say that we have betrayed our constituents, ‘selling out’ voters in Leave constituencies.
But – and this is important – that is only logical if you equate Brexit with a ‘no deal’ Brexit. There was no box on the Referendum ballot which said ‘no deal’ – in fact there was no detail at all – just a simple question of Leave or Remain. This, as I've said before, opened the door to chaos and it is this (the way we leave the EU) that we’ve been trying to negotiate in Parliament ever since.
I have openly opposed a ‘no deal’ because it damages our economy in the North East, which means jobs; it doesn’t guarantee workers' rights or labour standards; it scraps environmental protections and food standards; it leaves farmers in limbo and businesses facing years of uncertainty; it opens the way to trade deals that will demand a slice of our NHS and punitive trade terms.
Similarly, both of the Brexit deals that Theresa May and Boris Johnson have presented to Parliament threaten workers’ rights, dilute standards and leave our economy in crisis. I am not mandated to vote for either option: as the 2017 manifesto that I stood on, says: “Labour recognises that leaving the EU with ‘no deal’ is the worst possible deal for Britain and that it would do damage to our economy and trade. We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option and if needs be negotiate transitional arrangements to avoid a ‘cliff-edge’ for the economy.”
Instead, we said in 2017 that “Britain needs to negotiate a Brexit deal that puts our economy and living standards first”. I don’t think many people would argue with the fact that this hasn’t happened. This Tory Government has failed, spectacularly, to come up with a deal that could have satisfied the House of Commons. The failure is fairly and squarely theirs.
Those who argue that Labour has betrayed Leave voters are missing this vital fact. The Tories have not presented us with a Brexit that I, or many in my party, could accept, as a trade unionist – as someone who came into politics to enhance, not dilute workers’ rights. And there is one simple reason for that: it is because this Tory Party is packed full of Thatcherites, people who believe in a low wage, service economy and a small state with low levels of unionisation and employment rights. That’s what they want and that’s what they are using Brexit to get to.
The Labour Party in Government, on the other hand, will take the UK in a different direction: we will give people a final say on Brexit, but even more than that, we will transform our society so it is based on the principles of solidarity, collectivism and equality, rather than a race to the bottom. I think that sounds like common sense, not betrayal.
- Laura Pidcock is the Shadow Minister for Labour and MP for North West Durham
