meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Daily Politics from the New Statesman

How a chief whip became a rebel, with Mark Harper MP

Daily Politics from the New Statesman

The New Statesman

News & Politics, Society & Culture, News, Politics

4.41.4K Ratings

🗓️ 7 December 2021

⏱️ 23 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Ailbhe Rea and Stephen Bush interview the former Conservative chief whip Mark Harper MP.

They discuss his journey from chief whip under David Cameron to becoming a high-profile Tory rebel under Boris Johnson, his 2019 leadership campaign and why Keir Starmer’s new top team reminds him of Ed Miliband.

If you have a question for You Ask Us, email [email protected]



Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

Hello, I'm Alva, and I'm Stephen, and you're listening to the new Statesman podcast.

0:10.2

On today's episode we're joined by the Conservative MP Mark Harper to discuss his journey from

0:16.3

Chief Whip under David Cameron to rebel under Boris Johnson.

0:28.8

So we're in the parliamentary office of Mark Harper, former minister, Chief Whip turned

0:35.8

some say Chief Rebel to talk about his life experience, recent trajectory. I think we

0:43.7

get if we started with the recent difficulty of the government got it self into with the

0:49.3

standards though. Imagine for a moment you were still Chief Whip and that problem crossed

0:55.0

your desk. How would you have dealt with it differently? How do you deal with that situation

1:00.2

as Chief Whip?

1:01.2

Well, let me do this to you separately. On that specific issue, I think I'd have done

1:06.3

what I did actually, not being in the government. First thing I'd have done was go and get the

1:09.8

report and read it, and I plowed my way through the whole lot and to see what the facts

1:14.2

were. And frankly, reading the report, very clear, Owen had broken the rules on a number

1:19.4

of occasions. And frankly, I think the normal process should have been followed, which

1:22.7

is, you know, we don't make a huge deal about these things. There was a clear recommendation

1:26.6

for a sanction. I think the sanction was merited by what happened. The committee had taken

1:32.8

all the evidence, they'd listened to his views. So this idea that somehow there wasn't

1:36.4

an appeal. He'd had a full opportunity to set a case. And they had taken into account

1:42.0

the tragic circumstances of his wife having taken her life when they were thinking about

1:46.2

the sanction. And they had tempered punishment with some mercy, which I think is appropriate.

1:51.8

And I think, frankly, the motion should have just been put before the house. And normally

1:55.4

with these things, it goes through without the house dividing without us all having to vote

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from The New Statesman, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of The New Statesman and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2025.