Jump to content
king canary

New Labour Leader

Recommended Posts

The Speaker made a serious error of judgement. There is no getting round that.

Whether his apology is enough remains to be seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ricardo said:

The Speaker made a serious error of judgement. There is no getting round that.

Whether his apology is enough remains to be seen.

He's more chance of being Speaker next year than had he not done what he did. He's like the majority of politicians and in it to feather his own nest. So was it really an error of judgment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

A journalist summed it up when they said they received a text from an unnamed Tory MP, "We're nowhere near as angry as we're pretending to be"!

Even **** twonk Jacob Rees-Mogg understood the move. And if Hoyle was hiding, he didn't do a very good job of it considering he soon fronted up to the Commons later in the day.

Smells like another attempt at brewing up a culture war/gut the internal workings of Parliament to me.

Edited by TheGunnShow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Smells like another attempt at brewing up a culture war/gut the internal workings of Parliament to me.

Smells like a load of old nonsense to me.  This was one of the least important things to happen this week. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read somewhere that it was the Tories by removing their government amendment had the knock on effect of stopping the SNP one from being called next!

It just seems to me the SNP and then the Tories were playing politics and arcane HoP procedures yet managed to trip themselves up.

Meanwhile - the whole of the UK and civilized world wants an end to this carnage and moves towards a just peace.

 

Found this snippet - sources have later said the government actually didn't have the votes to knock out Labour. Hence all the manufactured humbug. 

Also, if the government can knock out the Labour amendment, that would lead to a vote on the original SNP motion – which will trigger a Labour revolt (because some MPs would support it). That is a second reason why the Tory whips have a reason for voting against the Labour wording – even though in practice it is hard to detect much difference between the government’s position and Labour’s.

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Are you for real? All this from a party that illegally prorogued parliament lying to the then Queen in the process.

I can't see what SKS has done wrong and Hoyle's actions (within his remit) were surely those of good intention (and indeed has the support of several of the rational Tories). Sometimes any Speaker has to make fine calls - he offered more choice not less!. 

I can smell pure humbug here.

You seem blind to many things.

Labour called a three-line whip on the SNP motion. Labour MPs then went crying to the whips that they would have to return to their constituencies and explain to the supporters of Hamas and Palestine why they voted against an immediate ceasefire. Up until this point no ceasefire was Labour policy. Starmer then realised he had to appease the Muslims and so went to bully the Speaker into accepting a Labour amendment which was against all protocols of the House. Just putting those protocols aside for the moment and that Labour could have withdrawn the three-line whip, we are left with the fact that Starmer caved in to extremist intimidation. He does it now, he will cave in again when he is Prime Minister. The extremists now know that they are dealing with a weak man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the speaker's intentions were sound. He seems to have united the house by and large, in a way.

It's impressive that even our leaders can't seem to be rational about the Middle East, in spite of it not being our war.

Watched a bit of France 24 last night talking about DRC. 2000000 displaced and declared a catastrophe. Who knew?

Edited by littleyellowbirdie
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I think the speaker's intentions were sound. He seems to have united the house by and large, in a way.

It's impressive that even our leaders can't seem to be rational about the Middle East, in spite of it not being our war.

Watched a bit of France 24 last night talking about DRC. 2000000 displaced and declared a catastrophe. Who knew?

Yes - Oddly we got the 'right' decision very much in-line with our allies (Canada, Oz, NZ etc). Same language. I think the government is actually quite happy with it, toughens up the UK position (c.f. Cameron) nicely without them needing to be seen to be stepping out of line. Quietly happy and will leave well alone!

Hoyle's also right the pseudo-rules need changing to stop such party political shenanigans derailing an otherwise serious subject / debate.

Elsewhere I see the Israelis have arrived in Paris. Thought to be a good indication of a new pause/ceasefire and prisoner/hostage swap.

DRC has been mentioned here but I agree seems very remote by comparison. Only somewhat troubling issue is Rwanda's apparent 'involvement' with some factions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...