Speaker plays straight bat on aid cut amendment – but then bowls PM a hostile bouncer
Seldom has a ruling by the Speaker of the House of Commons been so eagerly anticipated by MPs.
During the Brexit wars of a couple of years ago, pro-Remain John Bercow could be relied upon to deliver rulings to cause maximum turmoil and embarrassment for the government.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle is a much less partisan figure, however, and when he has to made a tricky or controversial ruling he relies on the advice of the Commons clerks and legal bods. Mr Bercow used to overrule them.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
PM avoids Tory rebellion over foreign aid
So when he had to rule on Tory MP Andrew Mitchell’s bid to use a piece of legislation on science research to reverse Boris Johnson’s overseas aid cut, cricket fan Sir Lindsay played a straight bat.
It wasn’t in order, he declared, to almost no-one’s surprise.
What was more surprising was Sir Lindsay’s angry attack on the government at the end of his ruling. From straight bat to bowling the prime minister a hostile bouncer.
First he encouraged Mr Mitchell and his supporters to apply for an emergency debate on the aid cut, which he duly did and now MPs will have three hours to attack the government. A free hit for the PM’s critics.
Then he rounded off his statement with some furious finger pointing at the government frontbench as he bluntly ordered ministers to hold a vote on the aid cut without delay – or he’d connive with MPs to find a way to hold one.
“I wish and hope, very quickly, that this is taken on board,” the normally cheery Sir Lindsay warned, his lip curling with disdain for the government’s attempts to dodge a vote.
“I don’t want this to drag on,” he said. “If not, we will then look to find other ways in which we can move forward.”
MP Andrew Mitchell has been leading efforts to reverse the cut in overseas aid
Then when Sir Lindsay’s deputy, Nigel Evans, tested support for Mr Mitchell’s application for an emergency debate, no-one rose to their feet quicker than former prime minister Theresa May, who was seated just a few rows further forward.
She was one of around 30 Conservative MPs who had put their names to the Mitchell new clause to the Advanced Research and Invention Agency Bill, a Dominic Cummings legacy, no less. What an ironic twist.
The Tory rebels included old bruisers like David Davis and Sir Edward Leigh, but cabinet ministers from the May years like Jeremy Hunt and Damian Green and MPs from both the Brexit and Remain wings of the party.
In his response to Sir Lindsay’s ruling and then in his bid for an emergency debate, Mr Mitchell claimed that had the vote gone ahead he would have won by nine or possibly 20 votes. He reminded MPs, of course, that he is a former chief whip.
Really? That assumes all the Conservative MPs who put their names to his new clause would have trooped into the Aye lobby with Labour, the Lib Dems and the SNP. Would Mrs May – victim of dozens of bruising rebellions as PM – go that far?
She has form for voicing her objection to a Boris Johnson policy and then absenting herself from a vote, no doubt because of a pressing engagement elsewhere.
Former prime ministers tend not to rebel, with the exception of Ted Heath during the Thatcher years. Not for nothing was he known as “the incredible sulk”.
Talking of ex-prime ministers, the Tories’ 0.7% aid spending pledge is a legacy of David Cameron’s time as Tory leader.
It was even written into law in 2015, as Sir Lindsay reminded MPs. That’s presumably why Mr Cameron’s former bag-carrier Sir Desmond Swayne was among the rebels.
Not that they would accept that they’re rebels. Since 0.7% was a Tory manifesto pledge, they’ve claimed throughout this row that they’re the loyalists.
Not sure that’s how the current chief whip, the burly, ruddy-faced Nottinghamshire farmer Mark Spencer, would see it.
With Mr Mitchell’s new clause ruled out of order, the debate that followed was a dismal anti-climax.
But hostilities will resume in the emergency debate and if and when the government brings forward a proper vote on the aid cut.
Sir Lindsay will no doubt continue to play a straight bat. But his mood suggests he is growing tired of the prime minister dodging the umpire’s rulings.
The chair of the Labour Party has insisted that Sir Keir Starmer will “absolutely” still be prime minister next Christmas, despite the party’s dire position in the polls.
Speaking to Sky’s Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, Anna Turley acknowledged that “things are still hard” for Britons, but struck an optimistic tone about the year ahead.
She said the government has “taken a lot of difficult decisions this year” to “stabilise the economy”, but we are now “starting to see that recovery”.
“As we go into the new year, I’m really optimistic about delivering the kind of change that people voted for last year, and to see them starting to see and feel it in their pockets and in their local communities,” Ms Turley insisted.
On average over the last 10 polls, the Labour Party is down in third place on 18.2%, while Reform UK is on 29.4%, and the Conservative Party is on 18.9%.
Trevor then asked if the public simply hasn’t noticed “how lucky they’ve been”, and the senior minister said: “Well, I think rightly, people are impatient for change. We all are. And people voted for change – that was on the front of our manifesto last year.
“But it takes time to deliver that. It takes time to stabilise things from the chaos that we inherited.”
She said fundamental changes, particularly those that require legislation, take time to deliver, pointing to the Employment Rights Bill, which only passed through parliament last week after the Lords repeatedly sought to amend it.
Ms Turley continued: “We live in the real world. We know things are still hard.
“But I’m conscious with every single day that goes by next year, people will really start to see and feel more money in their pockets, better public services when they’re looking for an appointment with a doctor, their streets and the neighbourhoods are looking better and better, and that change takes time.
“But we will be delivering that in the new year, and I’m confident people can really start to see that.”
Sir Keir Starmer is under pressure amid Labour’s dire position in the polls. Pic: PA
Asked directly if Sir Keir Starmer will be Labour leader and prime minister by next Christmas, Turley replied: “Of course. Absolutely.
“As I said, people will really start to see and feel the change in their pockets. He has got a very clear vision for making sure that people can really deal with the cost of living, that public services will get back on their […] feet.
“And he’s building a Britain that is one that is tolerant, that is open, that is confident in itself. And that is really about renewal and investment in young people as opposed to the division and the decline of the opposition.”
Read more:
Over half of Labour members want to ditch Starmer
Almost two in three Labour members back Burnham
Over a third of Britons think Reeves exaggerated bad news
Her backing of the prime minister comes amid continued unease on the Labour benches about the party’s position in the polls, and the manoeuvrings of some big figures who are rumoured to be plotting a move against the prime minister if May’s local elections go badly.
One such person thought to be preparing for a potential leadership bid is the health secretary, Wes Streeting, who has told The Observer today that he is not ruling himself out as a candidate for the top job in future.
“I’m diplomatically ducking the question to avoid any more of the silly soap opera we’ve had in the last few months,” Streeting said, despite also noting the “pressure” and the “demands of that job”.
Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham is repeatedly refusing to rule out a return to Westminster to challenge Sir Keir for the Labour leadership, and former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner is thought to be preparing to potentially launch a leadership bid of her own.
‘We’re going to smash the local elections’
Also on Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, the Conservative Party deputy chair, Matt Vickers, was bullish about his party’s prospects at May’s local elections.
“We’re going to go out there and smash these next elections,” he said.
“The reality is we had a tough general election. If anybody thought that we were going to dust ourselves off and be back in the game within months, then they’re a bit mad.”
US lawmakers have introduced a discussion draft that would ease the tax burden on everyday crypto users by exempting small stablecoin transactions from capital gains taxes and offering a new deferral option for staking and mining rewards.
The proposal, introduced by Representatives Max Miller of Ohio and Steven Horsford of Nevada, seeks to amend the Internal Revenue Code to reflect the growing use of digital assets in payments. The draft is set “to eliminate low-value gain recognition arising from routine consumer payment use of regulated payment stablecoins,” per the draft.
Under the draft, users would not be required to recognize gains or losses on stablecoin transactions of up to $200, provided the asset is issued by a permitted issuer under the GENIUS Act, pegged to the US dollar and maintains a tight trading range around $1.
The bill includes safeguards to prevent abuse. The exemption would not apply if a stablecoin trades outside a narrow price band, and brokers or dealers would be excluded from the benefit. Treasury would also retain authority to issue anti-abuse rules and reporting requirements.
Related: Crypto Biz: Bank stablecoins get a rulebook; Bitcoin gets a land grab
US bill defers taxes on crypto staking rewards
Beyond payments, the proposal addresses long-standing concerns around “phantom income” from staking and mining. Taxpayers would be allowed to elect to defer income recognition on staking or mining rewards for up to five years, rather than being taxed immediately upon receipt.
“This provision is intended to reflect a necessary compromise between immediate taxation upon dominion & control and full deferral until disposition,” the draft said.
The draft also extends existing securities lending tax treatment to certain digital asset lending arrangements, applies wash sale rules to actively traded crypto assets, and allows traders and dealers to elect mark-to-market accounting for digital assets.
Related: Galaxy predicts stablecoins will overtake ACH transaction volume in 2026
Crypto groups urge Senate to rethink stablecoin rewards ban
Last week, the Blockchain Association sent a letter to the US Senate Banking Committee, signed by more than 125 crypto companies and industry groups, opposing efforts to extend restrictions on stablecoin rewards to third-party platforms.
The group argued that expanding the GENIUS Act’s limits beyond stablecoin issuers would curb innovation and increase market concentration in favor of large incumbents. The letter compared crypto rewards to incentives commonly offered by banks and credit card companies, warning that banning similar features for stablecoins would undermine fair competition.
Magazine: 2026 is the year of pragmatic privacy in crypto — Canton, Zcash and more
Politics
Watchdog criticises ‘unprecedented’ government offer to delay local elections – as five councils confirm requests for postponement
The elections watchdog has criticised the government for offering to consider delaying 63 local council elections next year – as five authorities confirmed to Sky News that they would ask for a postponement.
On Thursday, hours before parliament began its Christmas recess, the government revealed that councils were being sent a letter asking if they thought elections should be delayed in their areas due to challenges around delivering local government reorganisation plans.
The chief executive of the Electoral Commission, Vijay Rangarajan, hit out at the announcement on Friday, saying he was “concerned” that some elections could be postponed, with some having already been deferred from 2025.
“We are disappointed by both the timing and substance of the statement. Scheduled elections should, as a rule, go ahead as planned, and only be postponed in exceptional circumstances,” he said in a statement.
“Decisions on any postponements will not be taken until mid-January, less than three months before the scheduled May 2026 elections are due to begin.
“This uncertainty is unprecedented and will not help campaigners and administrators who need time to prepare for their important roles.”
Mr Rangarajan added: “We very much recognise the pressures on local government, but these late changes do not help administrators. Parties and candidates have already been preparing for some time, and will be understandably concerned.”
He said “capacity constraints” were not a “legitimate reason for delaying long planned elections”, which risked “affecting the legitimacy of local decision-making and damaging public confidence”.
The watchdog chief also said there was “a clear conflict of interest in asking existing councils to decide how long it will be before they are answerable to voters”.
Sky News contacted the 63 councils that have been sent the letter about potentially delaying their elections.
At the time of publication, 17 authorities had replied with their decisions, while 33 said they would make up their minds before the government’s deadline of 15 January.
Many councils told Sky News they were surprised at yesterday’s announcement, saying that they had been fully intending to hold their polls as scheduled.
They said they were now working to understand the appropriate democratic mechanism for deciding whether to request a postponement of elections. Some local authorities believe it should be a decision made by their full council, while others will leave it up to council leaders or cabinet members to decide.
Multiple councils also emphasised in statements to Sky News that the ultimate decision to delay elections lay with the government.
Reform UK has threatened legal action against ministers, accusing Labour and the Tories of “colluding” to postpone elections in order to lock other parties out of power – a sentiment echoed by Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey.
But shadow local government secretary Sir James Cleverly told Sky News this morning that the Conservative Party “wants these elections to go ahead”. Sky News understands that the national party is making that position clear to local leaders.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government, said it was taking a “locally-led approach”, and emphasised that “councils are in the best position to judge the impact of postponements on their area”.
They added: “These are exceptional circumstances where councils have told us they’re struggling to prepare for resource-intensive elections to councils that will shortly be abolished, while also reorganising into more efficient authorities that can better serve local residents.
“There is a clear precedent for postponing local elections where local government reorganisation is in progress, as happened in 2019 and 2022.”
The five councils that confirmed they would be seeking postponements were:
- Blackburn with Darwen Council (Labour);
- Chorley Borough Council (Labour);
- East Sussex County Council (Conservative minority);
- Hastings Borough Council (Green minority);
- West Sussex County Council (Conservative).
The councils in Chorley, and East and West Sussex, had decided prior to Thursday’s government announcement that they would request a delay.
An East Sussex County Council spokesperson told Sky News: “It is welcome that the government is listening to local leaders and has heard the case for focussing our resources on delivery in East Sussex, particularly with devolution and reorganisation of local government, as well as delivering services to residents, such high priorities.”
They also pointed to the cost of electing councillors for a term of just one year, and argued that it would be “more prudent for just one set of elections to be held in 2027”.
Read more from Sky News:
David Walliams dropped by publisher
Woman jailed for plotting to murder husband
Christmas number one revealed
West Sussex County Council echoed those reasons and said it would cost taxpayers across the county £9m to hold elections in 2026, 2027, and 2028, as currently planned.
Chorley and Blackburn councils also cited the cost of delivering elections, and said they would prefer that money be spent on delivering the local government reorganisation and delivering services to local residents.
Meanwhile, 12 councils confirmed to Sky News that they would not be requesting delays:
- Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (Liberal Democrat-Independents);
- Broxbourne Borough Council (Conservative);
- Colchester City Council (Labour-Liberal Democrat);
- Eastleigh Borough Council (Liberal Democrat);
- Essex County Council (Conservative);
- Hart District Council (Liberal Democrat-Community Campaign);
- Hastings Borough Council (Green minority);
- Isle of Wight Council (no overall control);
- Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council (Conservative);
- Portsmouth City Council (Liberal Democrat minority);
- Rushmoor Borough Council (Labour minority);
- Southampton City Council (Labour).
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024