I've read that If the SNP really want to remove him then they can, because we simply cannot continue with the third largest party having no confidence in the Speaker. It's all a game of course. Hopefully they will see sense and we will now have a proper debate and a vote on a sensible motion that isn't being laid as a political elephant trap.
Speaker of the House of Commons
- Thread starter blup
- Start date
I've read that If the SNP really want to remove him then they can, because we simply cannot continue with the third largest party having no confidence in the Speaker. It's all a game of course. Hopefully they will see sense and we will now have a proper debate and a vote on a sensible motion that isn't being laid as a political elephant trap.
Sponsored Links
A political squabble among politicians.
Remember how long it took to get rid of Johnson after he unlawfully shut down Parliament, lied to the nation, to Parliament and to the Queen?
In fact he didn't lose his job for it. He got away with it.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 16,628
- Reaction score
- 2,339
- Country
I don't see a problem per say in the Speaker trying to give as many options as possible on a Gaza vote. He should perhaps have realised the implications of that, which was the Government not letting anyone play with their ball, and the SNP's motion not being voted on.
He has apologised. If the Tories are really feeling so sorry for the SNP they can find another way of letting them bring the motion again.
He has apologised. If the Tories are really feeling so sorry for the SNP they can find another way of letting them bring the motion again.
Faux anger from Tory MPs
Real anger from SNP because their devious plan failed.
The real story is that both Tory and SNP fear losing seats to Labour and this is just a political game to try and expose splits within Labour.
It’s hardly a secret that the harder leftists in Labour are ideologically supportive of Palestine ( ideological because they hate Israel being a successful capitalist country with strong ties to USA) …..and they are screaming for Starmer to call a ceasefire (despite it making zero practical difference)
Last edited:
I think the next SNP Opposition Day would usually be about three months away. I would hope, by then, that Labour will have come up with a solution to avoid any new bear trap.
Whoever is in government by then might do things differently.
I'd assume all SNP mp's have written their letter. It seems given the nature of the speaker that if he feels they wont accept him he will resign. The SNP party - according to report after being asked said they were prepared to let their MP's do what ever they like - at the moment.
I'm not sure an opposition motion is a bear trap, the trap was the hole the speaker dug for himself and fell into, and into which he might still fall again.
You are probably the only person who actually believes that.
Definitely genuine from backbenchers who expected impartiality from the speaker.
See above
That's always the backdrop, but not the occasion of the concern.
I don't buy that, on the narrow and very specific basis that it implies centrist Labour can't be guilty. The Rochdale labour candidate incident suggests starmy will defend his mates over an egregious conspiracy theory. That example seemed to me to be an immediate dismissal for gross misconduct situation. It was plain and simple a disgusting conspiracy theory, not even an attempt at measured, considered criticism.
The motion was what it was, that's not the issue, it's the way in which the speaker was leaned on, ignored the Clerk's advice, got his deputy to do his dirty work, apologised insincerely (when it all went pear shaped and his job was on the line). I doubt the bear trap as you call it will be materially different if/when the snp get another bite of the cherry, or that labour will be better prepared. In fact it could harm them more because of imminence of the election.
I was simply pointing out that the motion was crafted as a trap for Labour. Which you now seem to have accepted. That is a start.
They were supposed to be debating - albeit a pointless one - a situation in which tens of thousands have died.
In other words, get it into perspective, you tart.
Sponsored Links