|
Two factions of our beleaguered Government are angry
about Ruth Kelly's leaked resignation - for different
reasons.
The Transport Secretary told Gordon Brown in the Spring
that she wanted to step down at the next Cabinet reshuffle,
but somehow the news became common knowledge and at
3.15am yesterday, it was confirmed to journalists.
Critics of Brown accuse Downing Street of leaking the
news of Kelly's resignation to undermine a potential
rebel.
Brown responded by saying that the "toxic timing" of
news of the resignation was devised by Blairites to
suggest "dirty tricks" by Number Ten.
In her speech
to Conference yesterday, Ruth Kelly excused herself
for departing from her script for a while and said:
"As you may have heard on the news this morning
this will be my last time addressing you as a member
of the Cabinet. I told Gordon before the summer of my
decision to leave the Government for family reasons
at the next reshuffle."
Ruth Kelly wants to leave the Government to spend more
time with her four young children, which I respect her
for enormously, if this is the true reason, although
she should have thought about it earlier, but better
late than never I suppose.
As a member of the Roman Catholic Opus Dei, it surely
must have been awful at times to have been part of a
Government that cares so little about the sanctity of
life.
Mary Honeyball, Labour MEP for London says on her
blog:
"Ms Kelly is at last doing the decent thing and
going because she cannot support the Human Fertilisation
and Embryology Bill due to come before the House of
Commons soon for its third reading. It is well known
that Kelly not only opposed but forced a free vote during
the second reading on three of the Bill's most important
clauses: screening embryos for diseases to allow "saviour
siblings", the creation of human-animal hybrid embryos
for vital medical research and ending the requirement
for a father in IVF treatment."
I commented: "Why the heck should she if it is
against her conscience? Should there not be voices in
the Government to echo the feelings of the millions
of others who share her view on this? As for "ending
the requirement for a father in IVF treatment". That
disgusts me. To me that is child abuse, but that's Labour's
forte thanks to mountains of anti-children and anti-family
legislation."
Ruth
Kelly is right to put her children first, says Melanie
Reid in the Times and adds "As Ritalin increasingly
takes the place of proper parenting, let's praise a
politician with the correct priorities."
And let's condemn an infighting Government that doesn't
truly give a damn about children; their self-esteem;
their future.
|
