The vote on the call for ceasefire in Gaza

Why would a conservative say this against the leader of the
Labour Party, surely he isn’t concerned with the polls , gosh
unbelievable

I think because he shouldn’t have done it Whitewave.
I think the vote should have just gone through in the form the SNP put it.
Nonetheless I am worried about MP safety which is said to be the reason KS wanted an amendment.

I also think it was unfair to put the speaker into this position, but I think it was a misjudgment of the speaker to act on it.
I don’t think he should resign though, it would be a sad ending to a distinguished career.

For what it’s worth I think Hoyle made the correct decision to allow all the motions / amendments to be debated. Yes, it went against parliamentary convention but, so what. The issue of war is bigger than archaic parliamentary convention, and all our representatives in HoC should have had their voices heard. Perhaps it’s about time our out-dated system had a shake up! The Tories caused the mess by walking out. I think Hoyle should not have said that he made a mistake - IMO, he didn’t. He made a difficult decision which was different from ‘the norm’ and which some players didn’t agree with. That’s not necessarily a mistake - it’s actually brave. I’m more annoyed at him for now being so contrite and saying he was wrong.

I’m not annoyed with him, I feel sorry for him.

James Cleverly has given full support to the Speaker

Yes Maddyone I do feel sorry for him too but I just wish he hadn’t said yesterday that he’d made a mistake. He made his decision in good faith and for the right reasons. Sure, the outcome went ‘pear shaped’ but that wasn’t his ‘mistake’.

He made a decision after being influenced by someone else, against advice from (I believe) the Chief Whip and the Clerk to the Court about altering parliamentary procedure and ignoring protocol. Following that, he was unable to control the House, having lost authority.
It was a serious miscalculation, not a mistake and he should resign.

I also think it was better to debate all three motions. I believe it would be a political/diplomatic mistake to formally accuse Israel of war crimes and if only the SNP and Conservative motions/amendments had gone through IMO it would have given the LP, which I hope will be the next govt, a problem. KS is a very experienced lawyer and he will understand better than most of us, how important language is. fwiw I believe Israel is committing war crimes but if I was a LP MP I would not back an amendment that formally stated that. At some point this vile war will stop and there will have to be peace negotiations. I sincerely hope that it will not be with a Netanyahu led govt but the recipe for successful negotiations is always about letting both sides feel they have gained something so they are willing to give up something. The issue of war crimes is best left to another day, it is better to focus on humanitarian issues. Not what I feel as an ordinary Joe but it is what I would do as an MP, it's the pragmatic political choice. Most won't agree with me but it's what I genuinely think.

eazybee

He made a decision after being influenced by someone else, against advice from (I believe) the Chief Whip and the Clerk to the Court about altering parliamentary procedure and ignoring protocol. Following that, he was unable to control the House, having lost authority.
It was a serious miscalculation, not a mistake and he should resign.

He was also influenced by the police I believe?

The Speaker listened to the police, to some who experience
threats , to a MP who is a very experienced lawyer, he then made his decision

I agree with what you say mostly foxie although I do think KS made a mistake in apparently putting pressure on the speaker.
I’m unsure about the war crimes issue because I’m unaware if Israel has deliberately killed prisoners and I don’t think any rapes have been reported. But I’m not in any way an expert in this area, although it seems pretty clear even to me that Russia has committed many war crimes.

Only just read on Gransnet about the involvement of the police. I didn’t know.

Urmstongran

Geoffrey Cox, former Attorney General:

“ I am not calling for Lindsay Hoyle to go. He is mortified and realises he got this wrong. But the one who urged the ignominious surrender, for no doubt purely coincidental party advantage, and was reportedly seen to have mouthed “thank you” as he passed the Speaker’s Chair a few minutes later, was none other than Sir Keir Starmer, who in less than a year will ask that same people and Parliament to entrust him with the security of the nation.”

The SNP played a huge role in all this, too. But, hey, let’s just concentrate on people that we want to have a dig at.

eazybee

He made a decision after being influenced by someone else, against advice from (I believe) the Chief Whip and the Clerk to the Court about altering parliamentary procedure and ignoring protocol. Following that, he was unable to control the House, having lost authority.
It was a serious miscalculation, not a mistake and he should resign.

I agree. He would have known what the reaction of the SNP and Conservatives would be. He favoured Labour and should go.

I also think it was better to debate all three motions.

I agree with all your statement foxie.

The SNP played a huge role in all this, too

Yes! The SNP had 2 motions on Wednesday - the ceasefire one and one about the £28million for green issues. Both clearly designed to ‘stitch up’ Labour. The SNP used the issue of the carnage in Gaza to play political games, and are now trying to claim the upper moral ground. Outrageous!

The actions of the SNP are disgusting,political point scoring at its lowest level

The actions of the SNP are disgusting,political point scoring at its lowest level

👏👏👏

The SNP are "allowed" just 3 that is THREE days a YEAR to put motions to the house...Hardly democratic as it is ...our voices are NOT heard.To have Starmer hijack a motion thats very important to us for his own benefit is abhorrent .Seems you're ALL OK with rules being broken as long as its in your own parties benefit.And you wonder why so many Scots feel we need control of our own country.
There is NO DOUBT that what Israel is doing is a war crime.Indiscriminately bombing and killing tens of thousands of INNOCENT people ,thousands of children included is not in any way shape or form acceptable "warfare" whatever that is !
The statements from Israel receently about ridding the country of Palestinians is just a ramping up of the illegal landgrabs and interrnment of thousands of Palestinians since the inception of Israel.The recurrent ignoring of UN resolutions and NO action taken on them means Israel thinks it can, and is clearly proving that now, get away with MURDER

Beggars the question- why didn’t the SNP vote,?

Yet the SNP walked away from the opportunity to vote on such an important issue because it perceived that its scheme to trap Labour had failed. Mm, makes one question what was the SNP’s main aim - to actually get a vote through calling for a ceasefire … or to stitch up the Labour Party?

That was in response to ‘Paddyann’.

Seems the SNP objected to‘humanitarian ceasefire’

"Seems the SNP objected to‘humanitarian ceasefire"

No Annie bach. Distressed that none of the bigger parties in the UK parliament had made any attempt to submit a motion the SNP used one of their 3 precious chances to submit a motion which should have had cross party support and then a statement from the UK government in line with many other countries across the world. Labour had multiple chances to submit their own version but obviously felt that for their party it would be divisive.

In the event the speaker allowed the hijacking of the SNP motion by not putting it to the vote, instead only allowing a vote on the Labour amendment. Is it any wonder that the SNP MPs walked out in disgust? when it became obvious that once again they were not given their right. to speak. and. remember they are not a tiny party but actually the 3rd party by number of seats in the HofC