#Getting right tired of people ignoring his title here bc wouldn't do that to others even when they've pissed you off | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

obaewankenope · 2 months

Text

Seeing the stuff about the SNP and Labour and Conservatives and how SIR Lindsay Hoyle is being targeted by everyone because, as he stated, he tried to provide a variety of options for MPs to vote ammendments on because he'd had a meeting with police that same day about threats to MPs safety... And he's a well known person for caring about the safety of his fellows in the House... And like, the whole thing is just a mess.

Convention is not law.

By tabling a Labour Ammendment, SIR Lindsay Hoyle went against convention in the House, not law.

And conventions are gone against in the House, many many times, like, for example:

During a general election, the Speaker will stand for election in their constituency unopposed by the major parties. During the election, the Speaker will only campaign as a Speaker seeking re-election and not on any political points.[3]

This convention was not respected during the 1987 general election, when both the Labour Party and the Social Democratic Party fielded candidates against the Conservative speaker, Bernard Weatherill, who was MP for Croydon North East.

The Scottish National Party (SNP) does stand against the speaker if they represent a Scottish constituency, as was the case with Michael Martin, speaker from 2000 to 2009.[4]

The Speaker enjoys wide discretion to interpret the Standing Orders and relevance of precedent. They decide the procedure of the House.[1]

[source: Wikipedia]

Another "convention" which is well known for Conservatives to ignore, especially in recent years (looking at Boris fucking Johnson):

Any member that misleads Parliament is expected to resign.

[source: Wikipedia]

With accusations against Starmer and Labour being thrown by the SNP and Conservatives about pressuring etc, you have to remember that without the minutes being shared, OR an official statement in Parliament (where MPs aren't meant to lie or mislead Parliament) stating that Labour didn't do this, the SNP and Conservatives can and will keep throwing this accusation around.

But tabling an opposition ammendment as well as the government one to a motion is against convention but not against Parliamentary law.

I like convention to be followed but exceptions do get made, as we've seen in the past. Or changes to the conventions change to accommodate different circumstances:

The Prime Minister should be a member of either House of Parliament (between the 18th century and 1963).

By 1963 this convention had evolved to the effect that no Prime Minister should come from the House of Lords, due to the Lords' lack of democratic legitimacy. When the last Prime Minister peer, the Earl of Home, took office he renounced his peerage, and as Sir Alec Douglas-Home became an MP.

Another one:

All Cabinet members must be members of the Privy Council, since the cabinet is a committee of the council. Further, certain senior Loyal Opposition shadow cabinet members are also made Privy Counsellors, so that sensitive information may be shared with them "on Privy Council terms".

[source: Wikipedia]

Incidentally, we saw Labour Privy Counsellors not be given information recently by the Government about military actions against Houthis and there was some drama about that in the news and Parliament. Some argue convention was ignored there, others that it wasn't. But these aren't codified, written down laws or anything that Must Follow Exactly Every Step Exactly and so that means conventions have wiggle room.

Especially in special circumstances.

Personally, I've met SIR Lindsay Hoyle before and he's not a man who bows to pressure. He admits when he messes up, tries to not mess up again, and definitely learns from his mistakes. But he's a man who has been in Parliament for a long time, speaks with many MPs across all parties and has seen the rising hatred and violence aimed at MPs over the years get worse and worse.

The issue around Israel and Hamas and Palestine is messy and highly contentious with the public. Threats to MPs really are at an all time high. SIR Lindsay Hoyle is not a man who ignores danger to his colleagues. He's not a man who just lets things happen to avoid rocking the boat if he can do something to possibly protect his colleagues.

I get the anger of the SNP at their day being marred by a Labour Ammendment being added to the discussion alongside the Government but, honestly, this is more political games because I cannot imagine fora second that the SNP can see that Labour is still ahead of them in Scotland, especially with all the stuff that happened with Sturgeon and want to undermine them in an election year.

All I truly care about is one: treating SIR Lindsay Hoyle as a man who tries to do the right thing whenever he can (and owning up when he is wrong), two: getting the Conservatives out of power because we damn well need them out, and three: doing something about the issue in the Middle East because people are dying.

SIR Lindsay Hoyle has given the SNP an emergency motion debate to actually address that last point. That's more than other Speakers have done in the bloody past. Literally.

#Uk politics #SIR Lindsay Hoyle #Getting right tired of people ignoring his title here bc wouldn't do that to others even when they've pissed you off #Politics #United Kingdom

6 notes · View notes