Donate SIGN UP

Speaker Gate.....what Do We Think?

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 10:09 Thu 22nd Feb 2024 | News
35 Answers

So former Labour MP allows Labour amendment to SNP motion before said motion is debated and voted on. Genuine error or conscious bias?



21 to 35 of 35rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Avatar Image
the purpose of opposition days is to lend time to parties with significant representation in parliament that are not the official Opposition... they have the right to put forward proposals and by convention only the government may amend this is to stop all opposition being monopolised by one party keir starmer had the rules bent in his favour in order to...
10:21 Thu 22nd Feb 2024

Another person in high office who have had their so-called reputation of integrity trashed by Starmer who is bent as a nine bob note. Ex CPS solicitor should no better than bend the rules to suit

It's the Speaker who is in charge 

It all began with Bercow and the remainiacs bending the rules to suit their anti democracy agenda. Once convention is changed it stays changed. This was a wicked intervention by Starmer who bullied Hoyle into this unconstitutional action and is just an indication of whgat happens when the legal proffesion gets involved with political decision making. Starmer has spent his life trying to influence judges and legal enquiries and obviously thinks that he can carry on with his well rehearsed strategy. If he dare to do this whilst in opposition and under the spotlight then imagine what he intends if he becomes PM and leader of Parliament! He is not fit to govern. Also consider the disturbing fact that the labour party is now so reliant on a certain demographic set of voters that it is prepared to thwart the democratic wishes of the rest of us to accomadate them. If it is true that they feared violence from these new and exciting, would be, voters then it is even more shameful.

It seems to be rather unlikely that the Speaker, and this one in particular, would have caved in to threats of, effectively, deselection, after the next election. But who knows.

Sadly, I fear Sir Lindsay's time as Speaker is doomed. Much as I detest the appalling antics of the SNP, he needs to be able to command support of all parties, and if they are determined to see the back of him, he'll have to go.

After deliberately allowing the ammendment after being reminded umpteen times it was not wise, it is difficult to see how any political party could trust him again. Years of reputation deliberately destroyed by a foolish act, regardless of what influences did or did not exist. One can wait & see what he proposes today, but no amount of apology is going to sway anyone (much). After all, it's said it's easier to ask for forgiveness than get permission.

As has been pointed out, the SNP should also be cross with the Tories, because it was due to them going off in a huff and not voting down Labour's amendment that the SNP's amendment was never called.

But of course it isn't the Tories in Scotland who pose the major electoral threat to them 🙄.

There's a staggering amount of hypocrisy about all this - in and around the incontrovertible fact that Sir Lindsey messed up.

A humble and down-to-earth Speaker who apologises when he makes a mistake is a million times better than the pompous, condescending, self-aggrandising dwarf we had previously.  I think it's safe to say Sir Lindsay won't be making that mistake again.



The really stupid thing is that the vote will change nothing - whether it's the SNP, Labour or the Tories getting their way. 


I dunno, perhaps there would be less death threats from the elephant in the room?

slip a hoy was described as a startled rabbit almost ready to burst into tears when he came out of his cosy chat from the Reasons Room. Starmer, the bully boy pulls the strings and corrupts just to save a rebellion in his own party. Sue Gray was also described as a person who is impartial and has integrity. Pffft. Go tell that to the marines. Starmer knows were to find em.

If there is an issue with threats to MPs - and plainly there is - then why don't MPs concentrate on this, rather than the party political bickering?

I will take some convincing that the SNP motion was designed to do anything other than try to put Labour in a fix, and now both the SNP and the Tories are cross that Speaker Hoyle let Labour off the hook. It seems a bit of a stretch to me to argue, as I heard one Conservative MP do earlier, that she signed he motion against the Speaker with a "heavy heart" but "this is about defending our democracy". There was a simple "democratic" response to Keir Starmer: vote down his amendment with your majority before the red (or in this case it seems blue) mist descends.

He's got to go,bending the rules to suit himself and being under orders from sue gray his number was up if he did not comply with her orders,he was on HardTalk with stephen sackur recently and boy does lindsey love lindsey,what a nasty little man he is.

A load of sound and fury, signifying nothing. So much hypocrisy, as if the argument was more important than the thing they were actually debating ... which seems to have been forgotten.

Why not debate things that matter to us?

21 to 35 of 35rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Do you know the answer?

Speaker Gate.....what Do We Think?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.