This Lindsay Hoyle business

Chris_Boro said:
Ultimately it didn't, because the Tories pulled their amendment late on and caused the arguments and division Hoyle sought to avoid.

MP's have explained in the house how they've been threatened previously over debates on Gaza.

All for political posturing.
Click to expand...
Can you explain how the mechanism would have worked because nobody, here or in the media, has done so.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
Can you explain how the mechanism would have worked because nobody, here or in the media, has done so.
Click to expand...

What "mechanism" are you on about? I answered your question.

If you're still going on about Hoyle's decision, the intention was to have the SNP motion and both amendments debated and voted on to balance the house, which it would have been had the Tories not pulled theirs late on.

As with previous debates on Gaza, wording is jumped on by all sides and had been used to abuse MP's across the house depending on their affiliations in the conflict.

ODM's are a pointless non-binding talking shop 99% of the time, it's not fit for purpose for when major topics of interest are brought such as this, especially by a minority party. Had normal "convention" applied, The Tory amendment would have passed after some Labour MP's (and some Tory) rebel against the party to vote for something that calls for a ceasefire.

Is that a better outcome for you?
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
Can you explain how the mechanism would have worked because nobody, here or in the media, has done so.
Click to expand...

It has been linked on here. The media have gone over it many times on the days following the debacle.

“Because the operation of Standing Order No. 31 would prevent another amendment from being moved after the Government have moved their amendment, I will, exceptionally, call the Opposition Front-Bench spokesperson to move their amendment at the beginning of the debate, once the SNP spokesperson has moved their motion. At the end of the debate, the House will have an opportunity to take a decision on the official Opposition amendment. If that is agreed to, there will be a final Question on the main motion, as amended.

If the official Opposition amendment is not agreed to, I will call the Minister to move the Government amendment formally. That will engage the—[Interruption.] Order. I am going to finish. That will engage the provisions of Standing Order No. 31, so the next vote will be on the original words in the SNP motion. If that is not agreed to, the House will have the opportunity to vote on the Government amendment. Proceeding in this way will allow a vote to take place, potentially, on the proposals from each of the three main parties.”

Source: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commo...f8-7efc-430e-b434-829c57fa15f6/CommonsChamber

Due to the Government pulling their amendment there was only a vote on the amendment tabled by Labour. That is what Flynn was angry about - the SNP were unable to vote on their own unamended motion.

After all of that carry on this is what the House agreed to which seems pretty reasonable:

IMG_0504.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Chris_Boro said:
What "mechanism" are you on about?
Click to expand...
The mechanism which ensured the safety of MPs

Tell me if i have understood correctly. Had the Speaker acted within convention and called a debate on the SNP motion and the Governments amendment, the threat of danger toward the Members from protesters would have increased, but because he chose all three motions that threat waned?
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
The mechanism which ensured the safety of MPs

Tell me if i have understood correctly. Had the Speaker acted within convention and called a debate on the SNP motion and the Governments amendment, the threat of danger toward the Members from protesters would have increased, but because he chose all three motions that threat waned?
Click to expand...
What Mechanism?
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
The mechanism which ensured the safety of MPs

Tell me if i have understood correctly. Had the Speaker acted within convention and called a debate on the SNP motion and the Governments amendment, the threat of danger toward the Members from protesters would have increased, but because he chose all three motions that threat waned?
Click to expand...

There is no mechanism? I have no idea what you are talking about.

The reasoning for Hoyle's decision has been explained over and over in this thread. The wording in both the SNP motion and the Tory amendment was controversial and inflammatory to both side of the conflict in different ways.

You seem to be wanting some kind of smoking gun that proves your belief that Hoyle was protecting Labour. I have no interest indulging you further, especially if you ignore my questions in return.
 
LessoftheLip said:
You won BBG. Hooray 🏆
Click to expand...
BBG for some reason appears determined to be proved absolutely right on this thread. Despite many different views he's determined that his is the correct one, likely because he really, really wants to believe Keir Starmer is a vile bully and that he and the speaker have hatched some plan together to save the Labour Party any embarrassment.

It's a shame because ordinarily, I find BBG to be an excellent poster.
 
WeeGord said:
BBG for some reason appears determined to be proved absolutely right on this thread. Despite many different views he's determined that his is the correct one, likely because he really, really wants to believe Keir Starmer is a vile bully and that he and the speaker have hatched some plan together to save the Labour Party any embarrassment.

It's a shame because ordinarily, I find BBG to be an excellent poster.
Click to expand...
He doesn't understand.
 
gregorgregorovich said:
Not working too well, these pleas for a cease-fire. Shame.
Click to expand...
It is a shame but at the same time nobody was under any illusions that it would bring about a ceasefire, but the UK parliament is now on record as being in favour of a immediate humanitarian ceasefire. If this emboldens others to do the same perhaps a tipping point may be reached.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top