Did bad tactics undermine attempts to reduce the abortion limit

It may have been a free vote last night on abortion, but there is no doubt that by the time MPs went through the division lobbies, the issue had become tribal. With David Cameron leading almost the entire shadow cabinet into supporting a reduction to 22 or 20 weeks, "wavering" government ministers were persuaded to hold fire to prevent DC claiming the mantle of "moral leader" if the vote was won.

The notable exception was George Osborne, who voted the other way to Cameron in almost every division, including 'need for a father'. Was this Osborne positioning himself as a social liberal to distinguish himself from DC? No, believe cynical Labour MPs who see it as a deliberate strategy to give them a defence from charges that they had politicised the vote (which - frankly - both sides were clearly guilty of).

What was striking about the pro-life arguments however was how disorganised they were. Nadine Dorries, the de facto leader, was argued that the science supported a reduction to 20 weeks - but also then voted for a reduction to 12 weeks. This allowed the opposition to claim she was simply an anti-abortionist (which she denies) and was not interested in science.

I wonder, however, whether the vote could have been won if the pro-life lobby had focused all their efforts on just one target - say 22 weeks - rather than holding multiple votes and juggling sometimes overlapping arguments. Labour MPs certainly fear a more organised attempt next time may be successful.

And there will be a next time.

Comments

[Jeremy Poynton]

Next time? There won't be a next time for most of these Labour MPs, when the party is reduced to a rump at the next election.

[Faceless Bureaucrat]

This issue will resurface - once again politicians prove how out-of-touch they are with the public perception.

[Mad Max]

I abhor abortion and grudgingly accept it on medical grounds. It should be no more than 12 weeks. However, I would not want any prospective mother to end up in a back alley with a knitting needle. Its all very much a nightmare!

[NBeale]

As often happens in this rump parliament, one side won the vote and the other the argument. These appalling NuLab lobby-fodder will be "Slaughter"-ed at the next election, and then we'll have a sensible vote. Until then thousands of babies will alas be murdered by the abortion factories - real hospitals won't touch this.

[Paul Linford]

I agree that Osborne wasn't "positioning" in this case. If anything, I would say Cameron is actually the more "socially liberal" of the two.

[Unity]

Paul:

Not if you compare Osborne's voting record on touchstone social liberal issues with that of Cameron.

Osborne has the better record - not as good as Boris who is liberal to a fault on social issues - but better than Cameron.