Yesterday morning my regional whip telephoned to check that the Government could continue to rely on my vote in the Commons on foundation hospitals. My answer was a spontaneous “yes”. That was then. Now, until the Government clarifies, in a manner acceptable to me, its intentions on the Hunting Bill, my answer is changed to “no”.

Last week saw the 33rd anniversary of my election to Parliament. In all that time I have never voted against the Labour Whip. But, there can come a time when, as Cole Porter put it, something’s got to give. For me, that time has arrived.

Throughout those 33 years I have done all I can to bring about a complete ban on hunting with dogs. When Labour came to office in 1997, with a manifesto commitment not to bring in such a ban but to enable Parliament to do so if it so decided, I was content that at last my aspiration was attainable.

Well, by the end of that Parliament what was clearly wanted had not been achieved. Never mind; the 2001 election manifesto promised that, the Commons having “made clear its wish to ban foxhunting”, Labour would “enable Parliament to reach a conclusion on this issue”. Belatedly, a government Bill was introduced which, while not providing for such a ban, was capable of being amended to achieve it.

That Bill received a second reading, went into standing committee, and came out on February 27. I have never known a Bill take four months between its committee and report stages. But OK; after immense pressure from MPs, the Government put down the final stages for next Monday. And the Government had promised me — personally — in the House and in writing, that if the Commons amended the Bill to provide for a total ban, that would be the Bill introduced into the Lords and, if necessary, forced through under the Parliament Act.

Fine; on Wednesday the amendment was tabled. All that had to be done was for backbenchers to obtain a majority for it. Then, yesterday morning, I received a call from the League Against Cruel Sports, which said it had been tipped off that, if the amendment for a complete ban were carried on Monday, the Government would not proceed straight to the third reading, as planned, but would recommit the Bill to a standing committee, involving possible delay that could frustrate the Bill and the ban. This made me uneasy. Only a few days ago a friend in the Lords informed me that a pro-hunting Labour peer had, with a nudge, told him that the Government had a “cunning device” to halt the Bill.

So, yesterday afternoon, I asked the Leader of the House to confirm or deny what I had been told. In what was clearly a carefully drafted form of words, he confirmed it, claiming that this might be necessary if an amendment made the Bill technically faulty. In a conversation with a senior member of the Government shortly afterwards I made clear that the Government had been behaving in an unacceptable and devious fashion. After all, the committee stage ended four months ago and the ban amendment has been circulating among MPs since March. Don’t tell me that the Government did not know its precise terms. After all, it consists of 15 words. If there had been a problem, the Government could have cleared it up long ago.

This member of the Government assured me that any delay would be minimal. It had better be. If this Bill is not in a fit state to go to the House of Lords in time for the scheduled second reading on July 17, I shall regard my Government, a Government I have supported in every vicissitude and on every issue, of having acted in bad faith. In those circumstances, it will need to find someone else to help it out with foundation hospitals and other controversial legislation. After all, it will be I, as a loyal Labour backbencher, who will be standing firm on the implementation of a Labour election promise.

The author is MP for Manchester Gorton