Gaza vote row: minister refuses to back Commons
speaker
Health minister Maria Caulfield ‘disappointed and
surprised’ by Lindsay Hoyle’s actions but refrains from calling for his
resignation
Eleni
Courea and Libby Brooks
Thu 22 Feb
2024 05.45 EST
A
government minister has said she would “struggle now to support” the Commons
speaker, Lindsay Hoyle, and his position was “difficult” as he faces a mounting
challenge from MPs.
Some
Conservative and Scottish National party MPs have called for Hoyle to resign
after he broke precedent to take a decision that ultimately benefited the
Labour party on Wednesday night.
By Thursday
morning at least 57 MPs had put their names to a motion expressing no
confidence in Hoyle.
The Commons
descended into chaos after Hoyle decided to allow votes on three separate
propositions submitted by the SNP, Labour and the Conservatives on the war in
Gaza.
Dozens of
Labour MPs had been preparing to rebel against their party whip and vote for an
SNP motion calling for an immediate ceasefire. Hoyle’s decision to allow a vote
on the Labour amendment, which called for a ceasefire with caveats, averted a
rebellion and took the pressure off Keir Starmer.
Health
minister Maria Caulfield told Sky News she was “disappointed and surprised” by
Hoyle’s actions but refrained from calling for his resignation. “He’s normally
a very fair speaker and his actions yesterday were very, very different,” she
said.
“I would
say that I would struggle now to support him but let’s see what happens in the
next 24 to 48 hours.”
Hoyle
apologised on Wednesday after a breakdown of discipline in the Commons, with
Tory and SNP MPs storming out, and resolved to have talks with party leaders on
Thursday.
He told MPs
amid shouts of “resign”: “I thought I was doing the right thing and the best
thing, and I regret it, and I apologise for how it’s ended up.” He said he had
been “very, very concerned about the security of all members”.
But his
actions went against the advice of his clerk, who warned that it was a
“departure from the long-established convention”.
Caulfield
told Sky: “We need to be absolutely sure that the votes weren’t influenced last
night in any way … It has got implications going forward if we can’t be sure
that the House of Commons can be run fairly.”
Separately
she told LBC that Hoyle “went against the advice of the clerks of the house”
and “that is a bit of a red line”.
Tories have
claimed that Hoyle came under heavy pressure from Starmer and there were
reports that Labour threatened to oust him as speaker after the next election
unless he complied. Labour has vehemently denied this.
Labour’s
Pat McFadden, a shadow Cabinet Office minister, defended Hoyle and said he had
“acted in good faith”.
McFadden
told Radio 4’s Today programme that Hoyle “took the view that, given the strong
feelings in the country on this issue, that he would put before parliament all
three propositions that had been advanced on this – one from the SNP and one
from the Labour party and one from the government.
“He took
that decision to have the widest possible set of options before parliament.”
The Tories
withdrew from the vote on Wednesday night, with the Commons leader, Penny
Mordaunt, saying that Hoyle had “hijacked” the debate and “undermined the
confidence” of the house. There have been claims that the government whips did
not have enough support for their motion.
Speaking on
BBC Newsnight, the SNP’s culture spokesperson, John Nicolson, denied that the
group had purposefully walked out of the chamber together with Tory MPs on
Wednesday.
Nicolson
said: “SNP MPs thought the whole procedure was absurd. What SNP MPs did was
they went to the lobby, that’s the rooms beside the main parliamentary debating
chamber, ready to vote, they were anticipating and expecting a vote.”
“A number
of MPs cross-party said they wanted their constituents to know where they stood
on this and the problem with staged shenanigans was that MPs weren’t allowed to
express their views in the lobbies and vote.”
Other MPs
have told the Guardian that they went into the aye lobby to make the point that
they weren’t getting the chance to vote on their original motion. On Thursday
morning Westminster group sources say MPs feel frustrated and angry that the
focus has now moved so far from Gaza and at the way Westminster conventions can
be broken “when it suits”.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário