Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle has apologised to MPs after the chamber descended into chaos around a motion calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Wednesday was designated as an opposition day for the SNP, which chose to debate the Israel-Hamas war – and sought to persuade MPs to back its calls for an immediate halt to the fighting.
But a controversial decision from Sir Lindsay to allow a Labour amendment to be put to the House led to an uproar from Tory MPs – and eventually saw the government pledging to “play no further part” in proceedings, as well as the SNP not even getting to vote on its original proposal.
After Conservative and SNP politicians stormed out of the chamber in protest, Sir Lindsay returned to the Commons to face his critics, apologising for “how it all ended up” and saying he took “responsibility” for his actions.
But SNP leader Stephen Flynn said he would “take significant convincing” that the Speaker’s position was “not now intolerable”.
And 33 MPs from both his party and the Tories have now signed a no-confidence motion in Sir Lindsay – not enough to oust him yet, but a motion that could gain traction in the coming days.
Today’s debate was set to be the conclusion of days of drama over whether Labour would change its position on the conflict in the Middle East.
The party initially supported the government’s stance, calling for a pause in the fighting rather than a ceasefire, as it did not believe the latter would be sustainable.
Advertisement
However, after the SNP decided to force the issue to a vote in the Commons, Labour went further – putting forward an amendment calling instead for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire”, albeit still with its initial caveats that both sides would need to lay down their arms and Israeli hostages would have to be released.
Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge
Sky News Monday to Thursday at 7pm.
Watch live on Sky channel 501, Freeview 233, Virgin 602, the Sky News website and app or YouTube.
Labour sources told Sky News Sir Lindsay – who was a Labour MP before taking on the role of Speaker – had been pressured by party whips to select it, but a party spokesman denied the claim.
However, Tory MPs accused him of making an “overtly political decision” to select the amendment in order to prevent Sir Keir Starmer facing a rebellion from his backbenchers – who could have supported the SNP’s motion without a Labour option.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:53
Speaker angers SNP and tories
In a surprise move, Leader of the House Penny Mordaunt announced the government would be withdrawing its own amendment to the SNP’s motion – which reiterated the government’s existing position – saying the Conservatives would “play no further part in the decision this House takes on today’s proceedings”.
She said the decision of Sir Lindsay to select the Labour amendment had “undermined the confidence” of MPs in procedures, “raised temperatures in this House on an issue where feelings are already running high” and “put honourable and right honourable members in a more difficult position”.
But due to parliamentary rules, the decision to walk away meant Labour’s amendment passed and MPs could only vote on the altered motion – stopping the SNP’s original proposal even being voted on.
Image: Leader of the House of Commons Penny Mordaunt. Pic: PA
Instead of the aftermath being about the significance of the UK parliament officially backing an immediate ceasefire in Gaza for the first time, the focus returned to the impact of Sir Lindsay’s earlier decisions – with some Tory and SNP MPs leaving the chamber in protest.
The SNP’s Mr Flynn called for the Speaker to come to the Commons, asking deputy speaker Dame Rosie Winterton: “How do we bring him to this House now to explain to the Scottish National Party why our views and our votes in this House are irrelevant to him?”
And after some delaying tactics by MPs, the Speaker appeared to offer his apologies to MPs on all sides.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:15
Amid chaos in parliament, SNP and Conservative MPs have walked out of the chamber in protest at the Speaker’s handling of the Gaza ceasefire debate
As some MPs called out “resign”, Sir Lindsay reiterated his earlier justifications for selecting the Labour amendment, saying he had been trying to ensure all options were on the table for MPs to vote on – as well as protecting MPs’ safety.
He added: “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.
“I do take responsibility for my actions.”
But while Mr Flynn accepted the intention of the apology, he said the result of the Speaker’s actions saw “an SNP opposition day turn into a Labour Party opposition day”.
“I’m afraid that is treating myself and my colleagues in the Scottish National Party with complete and utter contempt,” he said.
“I will take significant convincing that your position is not now intolerable.”
How do you oust a Speaker?
On a chaotic night, the Speaker of the House of Commons appears to be fighting for his future in the role.
Our deputy political editor Sam Coates says he probably has as little as 24 hours to save his political life.
But how would he end up leaving the role?
According to the Institute for Government, there’s no formal means of removing the House Speaker from office.
However, they can fall victim to a vote of no confidence – making it extremely difficult, and likely untenable, for them to stick around.
One famous example was during the expenses scandal in 2009, when speaker Michael Martin resigned in anticipation of losing such a vote.
There has been speculation today that the government may look to make Sir Lindsay Hoyle subject to one too.
Given his apology to MPs tonight, he clearly recognises the strength of feeling and sheer anger at his handling of the Gaza votes
Were he to resign, it would kick off a vote to select his successor.
Candidates are put forward via written nominations, and if one secures more than 50% of the vote among MPs then a motion is put to the Commons asking to confirm their appointment.
If it doesn’t pass, selection and voting starts again.
If nobody secures 50% in the first place, the candidate with the lowest vote share gets removed from the ballot and the vote is repeated until someone does hit the threshold and a winner emerges.
Speaking to Sky News after the drama had unfolded, Mr Flynn apologised to the public, saying today should have been about Palestinians in Gaza.
“But Westminster does this, doesn’t it?” he added. “It turns into a [debate] all about Westminster and what a circus this is.
“Because thanks to the actions of the Speaker of the House of Commons, the SNP has been stitched up to the point that the Labour Party were the only game in town today.”
He said there would be some “serious recriminations”, adding: “Today was about something much bigger than Westminster, and yet here we are debating Westminster is nonsense.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:01
SNP leader says Speaker’s position may be ‘intolerable’.
Labour’s shadow defence secretary, John Healey, defended Sir Lindsay, telling Sky News’s Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge: “The Speaker is there to protect the rights of all MPs and he was trying to do the right thing.
“He was trying to make sure [there was] the widest possible debate because he knows it matters in parliament, it matters in our communities and it matters beyond the shores of Britain.”
However, Mr Healey criticised other MPs, adding: “This was a chance when we could have shown the best of parliament in coming together to demand an end to the fighting in Gaza.
“But instead we’ve revealed the worst of Westminster, with this descending into a row about procedure, with a boycott from the Conservatives, a walkout from the SNP, and frankly, this does nothing to help the Palestinians and it does nothing to advance the cause of peace.”
Faruk Fatih Özer was found dead in his prison cell on Nov. 1. The former CEO of now-defunct crypto exchange Thodex was serving an 11,000-year sentence for running one of the largest crypto scams in history.
His death marks the latest turn in the Thodex saga, with ripple effects so significant they altered Turkish cryptocurrency laws.
The initial details of Özer’s death point to suicide, but the investigation is still ongoing. It has once more brought Thodex back into the spotlight.
Here’s a look back at Özer’s story, how the crypto exchange impacted Turkish law and how it may have contributed to the country’s increased crypto adoption.
$2-billion Thodex scam sees raids, arrest and CEO out on the lam
On April 21, 2021, Thodex cryptocurrency exchange suddenly shut down trading and withdrawals. The initial announcement read that this could continue for four to five days. As Cointelegraph Turkey reported at the time, the exchange claimed that this was to improve its operations with the help of “world-renowned banks and funding companies.”
But local media reported that Özer had fled to Thailand with over $2 billion in funds as part of an exit scam. There were also reports that police had raided the exchange’s offices in Istanbul.
Istanbul’s chief prosecutor’s office corroborated the reports the following day. It announced a probe into Thodex and said police had arrested 62 people allegedly involved in the scam. Özer denied the accusations, claiming his trip abroad was to meet foreign investors.
As of April 30, 2021, a Turkish court decided to jail six suspects, including family members of the missing CEO and senior company employees, pending trial. Interpol also issued a red notice for Özer.
“When he is caught with the red notice, we have extradition agreements with a large part of these countries. God willing he will be caught and he will be returned,” said Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu.
Özer managed to evade capture for over a year. Albanian authorities eventually detained him on Aug. 30, 2022. He attempted to appeal extradition in court, but the decision was upheld, and Özer was in Turkish custody by April 30, 2023, two years after the scandal began.
Özer was detained by Turkish authorities after being extradited from Albania. Source: AA
The case against Özer was swift. In July 2023, just three months after arriving in Turkey, he was sentenced to seven months and 15 days in prison for failing to submit certain documents requested by the Tax Inspection Board during the trial.
In court, Özer claimed that he and his family were facing false accusations. He said, “I am smart enough to manage all institutions in the world. This is evident from the company I founded at the age of 22. If I were to establish a criminal organization, I would not act so amateurishly. … It is clear that the suspects in the file have been victims for more than 2 years.”
Özer was serving his sentence at the Tekirdağ No. 1 F-Type High Security Closed Penal Institution when he died. F-Type prisons are high-security institutions reserved for political prisoners, members of organized crime syndicates and other armed groups serving an aggravated life sentence.
Human rights advocates have repeatedly raised concerns about the conditions at F-Type prisons. In 2007, Amnesty International noted “harsh and arbitrary” disciplinary treatments, as well as isolation.
Turkey changes its laws to protect investors
The Thomex scandal and its ensuing fallout were so significant that they drove the Turkish government to change its policies toward cryptocurrencies.
Immediately following news of Özer fleeing the country, the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey banned crypto payments and prohibited payment providers from offering fiat on-ramps for crypto exchanges. The official notice outlawed “any direct or indirect usage of crypto assets in payment services and electronic money issuance.” Notably, the ban excluded banks, meaning that users can still deposit lira onto crypto exchange accounts using bank transfers.
The ban aimed to ensure financial stability, while other agencies like the Capital Markets Board (CMB) and the Financial Crimes Investigation Board (MASAK) moved to legitimize trading activities. In May 2021, MASAK amended money laundering and terrorism financing laws to include provisions for cryptocurrency.
By 2024, the “Law on Amendments to the Capital Markets Law” came into effect. This built on the initial changes in 2021, which included extensive consumer protection measures in addition to provisions on licensing and reporting.
These new measures, which also aimed to move Turkey off the Financial Action Task Force’s “gray list” of countries with inadequate Anti-Money Laundering measures, have in turn helped spur the local crypto industry.
Chainalysis’ “2025 Geography of Crypto Report” found that Turkey led the Middle East and North Africa in value received in crypto. Trading activity also spiked last year.
In the long term, the Thodex scandal may have led to increased crypto adoption in the country, but only after it rocked the Turkish crypto industry and left many investors out to dry. It also resulted in the imprisonment and death of its orchestrator and CEO.
A New York jury was unable to reach a verdict in the case of Anton and James Peraire-Bueno, the MIT-educated brothers accused of fraud and money laundering related to a 2023 exploit of the Ethereum blockchain that resulted in the removal of $25 million in digital assets.
In a Friday ruling, US District Judge Jessica Clarke declared a mistrial in the case after jurors failed to agree on whether to convict or acquit the brothers, Inner City Press reported.
The decision came after a three-week trial in Manhattan federal court, resulting in differing theories from prosecutors and the defense regarding the Peraire-Buenos’ alleged actions involving maximal extractable value (MEV) bots.
A MEV attack occurs when traders or validators exploit transaction ordering on a blockchain for profit. Using automated MEV bots, they front-run or sandwich other trades by paying higher fees for priority.
In the brothers’ case, they allegedly used MEV bots to “trick” users into trades. The exploit, though planned by the two for months, reportedly took just 12 seconds to net the pair $25 million.
In closing arguments to the jury this week, prosecutors argued that the brothers “tricked” and “defrauded” users by engaging in a “bait and switch” scheme, allowing them to extract about $25 million in crypto. They cited evidence suggesting that the two plotted their moves for months and researched potential consequences of their actions.
“Ladies and gentlemen, bait and switch is not a trading strategy,” said prosecutors on Tuesday, according to Inner City Press. “It is fraud. It is cheating. It is rigging the system. They pretended to be a legitimate MEV-Boost validator.”
In contrast, defense lawyers for the Peraire-Buenos pushed back against the US government’s theory of the two pretending to be “honest validators” to extract the funds, though the court ultimately allowed the argument to be presented to the jury.
“This is like stealing a base in baseball,” said the defense team on Tuesday. “If there’s no fraud, there’s no conspiracy, there’s no money laundering.”
What’s at stake for the crypto industry following the verdict?
Though the case ended without a verdict, the mistrial has left the crypto industry divided, with many observers debating the legal and technical implications of treating MEV-related activity as a potential criminal offense. Crypto advocacy organization Coin Center filed an amicus brief on Monday after opposition from prosecutors.
“I don’t think what’s in the indictment constitutes wire fraud,” said Carl Volz, a partner at law firm Gunnercooke, in a Monday op-ed for DLNews. “A jury could conclude differently, but if it does, it’ll be because the brothers googled stupidly and talked too much, for too long, with the wrong people.”
The shutdown of the US government entered its 38th day on Friday, with the Senate set to vote on a funding bill that could temporarily restore operations.
According to the US Senate’s calendar of business on Friday, the chamber will consider a House of Representatives continuing resolution to fund the government. It’s unclear whether the bill will cross the 60-vote threshold needed to pass in the Senate after numerous failed attempts in the previous weeks.
Amid the shutdown, Republican and Democratic lawmakers have reportedly continued discussions on the digital asset market structure bill. The legislation, passed as the CLARITY Act in the House in July and referred to as the Responsible Financial Innovation Act in the Senate, is expected to provide a comprehensive regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies in the US.
Although members of Congress have continued to receive paychecks during the shutdown — unlike many agencies, where staff have been furloughed and others are working without pay — any legislation, including that related to crypto, seems to have taken a backseat to addressing the shutdown.
At the time of publication, it was unclear how much support Republicans may have gained from Democrats, who have held the line in demanding the extension of healthcare subsidies and reversing cuts from a July funding bill.
Is the Republicans’ timeline for the crypto bill still attainable?
Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis, one of the market structure bill’s most prominent advocates in Congress, said in August that Republicans planned to have the legislation through the Senate Banking Committee by the end of September, the Senate Agriculture Committee in October and signed into law by 2026.
Though reports suggested lawmakers on each committee were discussing terms for the bill, the timeline seemed less likely amid a government shutdown and the holidays approaching.