advertisement


Labour Leader: Keir Starmer VII

What an utter shambles - it's completely embarrassing to think this is how the people we elect to govern us can behave at a time when another country is routinely murdering hundreds of people every week in pursuit of their Zionist dream. Any normal intelligent decent human being would be calling for a complete unconditional ceasefire, but not our government or a good part of the opposition... I'm absolutely disgusted by their stance and behaviour.
 
So the SNP tried to embarass Labour with their motion, Labour put in their amendment, Tories then put in their amendment. When it came to the vote, the Tories refused to participate, then chaos, motion and amendment passed without division and no vote for anyone. The SNP and possibly the Tories want the speaker out and many want to know if or how Starmer influenced the speaker to allow their amendment.

The circus had its fun, Hoyle will probably resign tomorrow and the pigs will be back at the trough again tomorrow.
 
It’s what happens when a political class that thinks politics means manipulating procedures, bullying people and doing performative adulting slams into actual politics, in the shape of a devastating war and public protest. There’s going to be a lot more of this. These people are completely detached from reality and they will blow up like an exploding clown car every time they’re forced into contact with it.
 
notaclue said:
On balance, yes. Because she has said it officially in her role the Commons, I would believe her over Watt saying something on Twitter from an unnamed source. I would have expected her to fudge the answer if it were true rather than clearly saying his report was wrong.
Click to expand...
I can’t find a report of what she said but I wonder why she’s denying it rather than Hoyle, and what makes her an authoritative source, and why Watt’s source was so reckless as to just straight up lie to their chosen courtier, and what motivated Hoyle to bring the house down like this if it wasn’t what Watt claims. Also, when “Labour sources” boast about their shitty behaviour it’s the one time I’m inclined to believe them.
 
It is here https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/gaza-ceasefire-vote-government-commons-b2500152.html

"Conservative MP Philip Davies referred to a tweet saying that senior Labour figures were told the Speaker was warned Labour would “bring him down” after the general election unless he called Labour’s Gaza amendment.
Amid shouts of “shocking” and jeers from Tory MPs, he added: “Can you assure the House that everything will be done to identify who it was that put that intolerable pressure on the House of Commons Speaker?”
Dame Rosie replied: “That tweet is wrong and the statement is incorrect.”"

Though Davies specifically mentioned it was Watt's tweet, which isn't stated there.

While Hoyle did not explicitly deny it like that, he did take exception with a Tory MP who shouted something about him meeting Sue Gray today and he told the Tory MP to retract it. As I understand it (from social media), that is the rumour - it was Sue Gray wot done it.
 
notaclue said:
It is here https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/gaza-ceasefire-vote-government-commons-b2500152.html

"Conservative MP Philip Davies referred to a tweet saying that senior Labour figures were told the Speaker was warned Labour would “bring him down” after the general election unless he called Labour’s Gaza amendment.
Amid shouts of “shocking” and jeers from Tory MPs, he added: “Can you assure the House that everything will be done to identify who it was that put that intolerable pressure on the House of Commons Speaker?”
Dame Rosie replied: “That tweet is wrong and the statement is incorrect.”"

Though Davies specifically mentioned it was Watt's tweet, which isn't stated there.

While Hoyle did not explicitly deny it like that, he did take exception with a Tory MP who shouted something about him meeting Sue Gray today and he told the Tory MP to retract it. As I understand it (from social media), that is the rumour - it was Sue Gray wot done it.
Click to expand...
Pretty weak stuff if you ask me and I’m going to go with Occam’s Razor, but who the hell knows/cares. One way or another it’s a joke. Deeply unserious people ****ing around with a system that is plainly unfit for purpose. Weekend at Bernie’s, but the corpse is British democracy.
 
We can take this as a vaguely official statement. Nandy 'utterly rejects' telling the Speaker what to do and categorically denies threatening him, but fudges the question over Labour MPs' security so that might be what happened. Labour spoke to him with concerns about that and he agreed with this position and changed convention, which might be interpreted as bias in coming days.

 
What would any of you had done in Hoyle’s shoes? It seems to me he was pressured into selecting the Labour amendment. I think if he had a free hand he would have gone with Commons convention. The whole thing smacks of all three parties gaming the system for their own petty advantage and it has dragged the reputation of the Commons even further into the mud. Me? I’d like to think I’d have consulted Erskine May / the Commons clerk. The Speaker has to be impartial. The moment he becomes the story he is toast, or at least on very very rocky ground. If he survives till the end of this parliament then he’ll be hoping against hope for a Labour victory at the next election because that’s the only chance he has to continue as Speaker.
 
Kirk said:
Regarding your confected questions about hypothetical futures (addressed in my previous post), I would have recommended a quick call to Mystic Meg but she died last year. Maybe Tarot cards would help.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Kirk. Your post confirmed a lot of things I had previously merely assumed to be true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top