Following a contentious and sometimes chaotic parliamentary debate on Gaza, the speaker of the House of Commons made an extraordinary apology.
A Labour motion demanding a “urgent humanitarian ceasefire” in Gaza was approved by MPs by a unanimous majority, but only after Lindsay Hoyle overturned decades of parliamentary practice to let the party to put its move to a vote.
The decision made by Hoyle, which the speaker claimed was intended to air a wide range of viewpoints but also helped the Labour leader to avoid the worst revolt of his leadership, infuriated MPs from the Conservative and Scottish National parties.
Now, some are pushing for Hoyle’s resignation, while others are calling on the Conservatives to defy convention and support him in the next election.
After Tory and SNP MPs left the room, Labour’s amendment ultimately passed without opposition. Afterwards, Starmer charged that they had “chosen political games over serious answers.”
After a six-hour argument characterized by parliamentary machismo, repeated yelling across the Commons chamber, and charges of partisanship directed at the speaker, Hoyle apologized to the members of parliament.
The speaker made an unexpected announcement to a crowded chamber, saying, “It is obvious that today did not showcase the house at its best. Of course, I will consider my role in it.
He went on, “I have tried to do what I thought was right for both sides of this House.” I apologize for the unfortunate outcome of the decision, which did not turn out the way I had hoped.
Following a dramatic day in Westminster where Starmer personally lobbied the Speaker of the House of Commons to enable his motion to be put to a vote, the apology was made.
Up to 100 Labour MPs had threatened to defy party orders and vote in favor of a Scottish National Party amendment demanding an immediate ceasefire unless Labour had a comparable alternative, as Labour MPs had informed Starmer. At least two shadow cabinet ministers reportedly considered quitting over the matter, according to sources.
On Tuesday, Labour declared that it will propose an amendment that would demand a “immediate humanitarian ceasefire,” to be implemented only in specific situations, for example, if Hamas ceased threatening violence against Israel.
The Labour amendment’s phrasing was sufficient to convince a number of MPs to vote for it rather than the SNP motion, which Labour had rejected on the grounds that it did not go far enough in outlining the requirements for a ceasefire.
In what would have been the largest open challenge to Starmer’s leadership since he assumed office, Labour MPs threatened to vote for the SNP’s resolution if they were not allowed to vote on their own amendment.
Hoyle was still undecided whether calling the Labour motion, the government amendment to the motion, or both, with hours to go before the vote. Following a last-minute intervention by Starmer himself, the speaker chose to call both, a move that infuriated the benches of the Conservative and SNP.
Threats to the individual safety of numerous Members of Parliament, Hoyle later stated, had convinced him to approve both changes.
A number of Labour MPs who voted against a similar SNP resolution in November claim they have since received threats and insults, and when hundreds of demonstrators gathered outside Westminster, Hoyle was convinced to provide them with an escape path.
However, he came under fire from Tom Goldsmith, his own clerk, who expressed in a letter that the decision was “a departure from the long-established tradition for dealing with such modifications.”
Then, in a parliamentary resolution, Conservative MP William Wragg expressed his lack of confidence in the speaker. 33 MPs, primarily from the SNP, had signed onto Wragg’s proposal by Wednesday night.
Following an often acrimonious Commons debate, House of Commons leader Penny Mordaunt declared the government will abstain from the votes, allowing the Labour amendment to pass without opposition.
As she made her judgment, Mordaunt attacked Hoyle vehemently, claiming he had “hijacked” the discussion and “undermined the confidence of the Commons.”
“You are our speaker, and we wish you to defend the rights of all members of this House,” she said after accepting Hoyle’s apologies.
The opposition day for the Scottish National Party (SNP) has changed to become a Labour party opposition day, and I fear that this is treating my coworkers and myself with complete contempt.” stated Stephen Flynn, the leader of the SNP in Westminster. It will take a lot of persuasion to convince the Speaker that your stance is no longer untenable.
Although Hoyle will still have to deal with the wrath of numerous MPs, Labour sources feel that Hoyle’s job is safe and that a large portion of the government’s ire was manipulated for impact. During a debate regarding the conflict in Gaza, there were others who cautioned that the dispute over esoteric parliamentary procedure could damage the Commons’ standing among voters.