Jack Tame: Labour MP accusing the party-of-kindness of bullying is a remarkable turn

Don’t make me say it. Don’t make me say it.

A week is a long time in...

I’ll start with Gaurav Sharma. I don’t think we know enough about what has been alleged to have certainty as who is the bully and who is being bullied, but I’m stunned this dispute has been allowed to fester to the point Sharma decided to speak out. Seeing a sitting Labour MP accuse the party-of-kindness of bullying is a remarkable turn.

I was not surprised to read Gaurav Sharma’s lengthy post on Facebook, last night. Even as the Prime Minister was addressing the issue, unnamed ‘Labour sources’ were commenting to media and slagging him off. Such kindness! And despite the compassionate veneer, the Prime Minister’s statement still carefully insinuated that everything Sharma was complaining about is actually his fault. Maybe it is! We don’t know. And maybe she felt she simply had to defend her party. But I think a public comment that was truly dedicated to Sharma’s wellbeing would not have included this line:

"Starting out as a new MP can be challenging and one of the toughest parts is navigating the new environment but also the role you must play as an MP managing others.”

See what I mean? Those words subtly insinuated that Sharma is the problem and that he’s ill-equipped to be an MP. From his perspective, it was a provocative thing to say. Perhaps I’m reading too much into it, but I wasn’t at all surprised to see him react.

Almost everything that can be said of the Sam Uffindell scandal has already been said. Obviously he was a lout and a bully as a teenager. He traumatised people. He benefitted from the comforts, trappings, and multiple opportunities afforded by money and privilege. Nonetheless, I don’t think the best response is to mercilessly destroy his entire life.

Christopher Luxon’s handled it pretty well. We’ll wait and see what the investigation from Maria Dew Q.C turns up. But for all the attention on what Uffindell did and didn’t do, who in the party knew what and when they knew it, for how long someone deserves to be punished for their past mistakes, and whether his apology was cynical or genuine, I do think there is once central question in this whole fiasco that should be top of the list:

Why was Sam Uffindell selected in the first place?

.css-dsh549{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;font-weight:700;margin-bottom:1rem;margin-top:2.8rem;width:100%;-webkit-box-pack:start;-ms-flex-pack:start;-webkit-justify-content:start;justify-content:start;}@media only screen and (max-width: 599px){.css-dsh549{padding-left:0;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;}}.css-dsh549 .eagfbvw0{-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;color:#27292D;}