Connect with us

Published

on

Raised voices, walk-outs, calls for resignations, even a few tears – it was a hairy day over in parliament on Wednesday and not the usual scenes expected from an opposition day debate.

So what rattled Westminster and its MPs? And how did the Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, find himself at the centre of the furore?

Politics live: Tens of MPs sign no-confidence motion in Speaker after Commons chaos

We take a look at how the saga played out.

What was supposed to happen?

As the third largest party in the Commons, the SNP is entitled to three opposition days in parliament every session – letting them pick the topic to be debated on the floor of the chamber.

Wednesday was one of those days, and the party chose the Israel-Hamas war, laying down a motion calling for an “immediate ceasefire” in the Middle East.

More on Conservatives

Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge

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.

Tap here for more

This has been a long-held position of the SNP, so the proposal came as no surprise.

But it did lead to mounting pressure on the Labour Party to shift its position – which had, until this point, echoed the government’s calls for a “pause” – as the last time a ceasefire vote took place, there was a raft of resignations from their frontbench.

So, on Tuesday – and after days of speculation – shadow foreign secretary David Lammy announced Labour would be putting forward an amendment to the SNP motion, calling for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire”.

There were still caveats in place, including ensuring both sides laid down their weapons and that all the Israeli hostages were released, but it was seen as a big shift for Labour.

Come Wednesday, the stage was set for the debate – but little did we know about the chaos that was coming.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Labour’s David Lammy calls for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire”

Why is the Speaker in trouble?

At the start of a debate on a motion, it is down to the Speaker to decide if any amendments to it can be debated and voted on.

But parliamentary convention says that if the motion has been put forward by an opposition party, like the SNP, it cannot be amended by another opposition party, like Labour – only by the government.

Despite anger from his clerk, and feathers being spat by a number of MPs, Sir Lindsay decided both the government and Labour’s amendments to the SNP’s motion could and would be voted on, claiming he wanted to give the House as many options as possible when debating such an emotive topic.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Speaker angers SNP and Tories

Conservative MPs accused the Speaker – a Labour MP before taking on the role – of making an “overtly political decision” to help Sir Keir Starmer fend off a rebellion from his own MPs, who could back the SNP motion without a Labour alternative to support.

Then came a curve ball from the Tory Leader of the House, Penny Mordaunt, who decided to pull the government’s amendment from the floor.

She announced her party would “play no further part” in proceedings in protest at the actions of Sir Lindsay – something she claimed “undermined the confidence” of MPs in the House’s procedures.

Penny Mordaunt Beach Ken
Image:
Penny Mordaunt made a surprise move by pulling the government’s amendment. Pic: Sky News

And with that amendment gone – and Tories abstaining from any votes – Labour’s amendment was able to pass without a vote.

But that meant the original SNP motion had been changed to Labour’s form of words, and the Scottish MPs never got a chance to vote on their own proposal, leading to fury from their benches.

How has he responded?

MPs from the SNP and the Conservatives staged a walkout in protest to what had played out and demanded Sir Lindsay come to the Commons to explain himself.

And eventually, he did, apologising to all sides over what had happened.

The Speaker 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.

“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.

“I do take responsibility for my actions.”

But Tory MPs were heard shouting “resign” throughout his apology, and SNP leader Stephen Flynn said he would “take significant convincing” that his position was “not now intolerable”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

SNP leader says Speaker’s position may be ‘intolerable’

Could Sir Lindsay be replaced?

After all the drama had come to a close in the chamber, there were more parliamentary shenanigans to be had.

A group of 33 MPs from both the Tories and the SNP signed up to a no-confidence motion in Sir Lindsay in the form of an early-day motion.

So-called EDMs are rarely debated, but they offer MPs a way of drawing attention to their views and stating them publicly.

So while it may highlight their unhappiness with the Speaker, it doesn’t push him out the door.

Yet there is a feeling in the air that Sir Lindsay is going to have to fight to keep his job now and win over his critics.

How would parliament choose a new speaker?

According to the Institute for Government, there’s no formal means of removing the Speaker from their role.

But MPs can hold a vote of no-confidence in him or her, making it extremely difficult for them to hold on – and perhaps pushing them towards resigning.

If Sir Lindsay did step down – either because of a vote or the threat of one coming his way – the chair would need to be filled.

Candidates would be put forward via written nominations, and if one secured more than 50% of the vote among MPs, a motion would be put to the Commons to confirm their appointment.

If the motion didn’t pass, selection and voting would start again.

If nobody secured 50% in the first place, the candidate with the lowest vote share would be removed from the ballot and the vote would be repeated until someone hit the threshold and a winner emerged.

Continue Reading

Politics

Row over how many farms will be affected by inheritance tax policy – as PM doubles down ahead of farmers protest

Published

on

By

Row over how many farms will be affected by inheritance tax policy - as PM doubles down ahead of farmers protest

Sir Keir Starmer has insisted the “vast majority of farmers” will not be affected by changes to Inheritance Tax (IHT) ahead of a protest outside parliament on Tuesday.

It follows Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing a 20% inheritance tax that will apply to farms worth more than £1m from April 2026, where they were previously exempt.

But the prime minister looked to quell fears as he resisted calls to change course.

Speaking from the G20 summit in Brazil, he said: “If you take a typical case of a couple wanting to pass a family farm down to one of their children, which would be a very typical example, with all of the thresholds in place, that’s £3m before any inheritance tax is paid.”

Politics latest: No 10 insists chancellor has been ‘straight’ about her CV

The comments come as thousands of farmers, including celebrity farmer Jeremy Clarkson, are due to descend on Whitehall on Tuesday to protest the change.

And 1,800 more will take part in a “mass lobby” where members of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) will meet their MPs in parliament to urge them to ask Ms Reeves to reconsider the policy.

Speaking to broadcasters, Sir Keir insisted the government is supportive of farmers, pointing to a £5bn investment announced for them in the budget.

He said: “I’m confident that the vast majority of farms and farmers will not be affected at all by that aspect of the budget.

“They will be affected by the £5bn that we’re putting into farming. And I’m very happy to work with farmers on that.”

Sir Keir’s spokesman made a similar argument earlier on Monday, saying the government expects 73% of farms to not be affected by the change.

Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed said only about 500 out of the UK’s 209,000 farms would be affected, according to Treasury calculations.

However, that number has been questioned by several farming groups and the Conservatives.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Farming industry is feeling ‘betrayed’ – NFU boss

Government figures ‘misleading’

The NFU said the real number is about two-thirds, with its president Tom Bradshaw calling the government’s figures “misleading” and accusing it of not understanding the sector.

The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the policy could affect 70,000 farms.

Conservative shadow farming minister Robbie Moore accused the government last week of “regurgitating” figures that represent “past claimants of agricultural property relief, not combined with business property relief” because he said the Treasury does not have that data.

Read more:
Farmers warn of food price hikes due to inheritance tax policy

Minister downplays risk of empty shelves if farmers strike

Farmers' tractor protest outside the Welsh Labour conference in Llandudno, North Wales
Image:
Welsh farmers carried out a protest outside the Welsh Labour conference in Llandudno, North Wales, over the weekend

Agricultural property relief (APR) currently provides farmers 100% relief from paying inheritance tax on agricultural land or pasture used for rearing livestock or fish, and can include woodland and buildings, such as farmhouses, if they are necessary for that land to function.

Farmers can also claim business property relief (BPR), providing 50% or 100% relief on assets used by a trading business, which for farmers could include land, buildings, plant or machinery used by the business, farm shops and holiday cottages.

APR and BPR can often apply to the same asset, especially farmed land, but APR should be the priority, however BPR can be claimed in addition if APR does not cover the full value (e.g. if the land has development value above its agricultural value).

File pic: iStock
Image:
APR and BPR can apply to farmland, which the Conservatives say has been overlooked by the Treasury in compiling its impact figures. File pic: iStock

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

Mr Moore said the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Treasury have disagreed on how many farms will be impacted “by as much as 40%” due to the lack of data on farmers using BPR.

Lib Dem MP Tim Farron said last week1,400 farmers in Cumbria, where he is an MP, will be affected and will not be able to afford to pay the tax as many are on less than the minimum wage despite being asset rich.

Continue Reading

Politics

Cabinet split over assisted dying as Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson latest to reveal she will vote against bill

Published

on

By

Cabinet split over assisted dying as Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson latest to reveal she will vote against bill

A split is emerging in the cabinet, with Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson revealing she will join several of her colleagues and vote against the bill to legalise assisted dying.

Ms Phillipson told Sky News she will vote against the proposed legislation at the end of this month, which would give terminally ill people with six months to live the option to end their lives.

She voted against assisted dying in 2015 and said: “I haven’t changed my mind.

“I continue to think about this deeply. But my position hasn’t changed since 2015.”

Politics latest: Starmer on Ukraine as he attends Rio G20

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Details of end of life bill released

MPs will be given a free vote on the bill, so they will not be told how to vote by their party.

The topic has seen a split in the cabinet – however, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has yet to reveal how he will vote on 29 November.

Ms Phillipson joins some other big names who have publicly said they are voting against the bill

These include Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds.

Border security minister Angela Eagle is also voting against the bill.

Senior cabinet members voting in favour of assisted dying include Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Science Secretary Peter Kyle, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Transport Secretary Louise Haigh and Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens.

The split over the issue is said to be causing friction within government, with Sir Keir rebuking the health secretary for repeatedly saying he is against the bill and for ordering officials to review the costs of implementing any changes in the law.

Read more:
What is in the assisted dying bill?

Why is assisted dying so controversial and where is it already legal?

Health Secretary Wes Streeting delivering a keynote speech on the second day of the 2024 NHS Providers conference and exhibition, at the ACC Liverpool. Picture date: Wednesday November 13, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story POLITICS NHS. Photo credit should read: Peter Byrne/PA Wire
Image:
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has called for a cost report into assisted dying. Pic: PA

Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates has been told Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff, is concerned about the politics of the bill passing.

He is understood to be worried the issue will dominate the agenda next year and, while he is not taking a view on the bill, he can see it taking over the national conversation and distracting from core government priorities like the economy and borders.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

Details of the bill were published last week and include people wanting to end their life having to self-administer the medicine.

It would only be allowed for terminally ill people who have been given six months to live.

Two independent doctors would have to confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge would have to give their approval before it could go ahead.

Continue Reading

Politics

Lord Patten calls on Sir Keir Starmer to condemn ‘sham’ sentencing of 45 Hong Kong pro-democracy campaigners

Published

on

By

Lord Patten calls on Sir Keir Starmer to condemn 'sham' sentencing of 45 Hong Kong pro-democracy campaigners

Lord Patten, the last governor of Hong Kong, has called on the British government to condemn the “sham” sentencing of 45 Hong Kong politicians and activists as Sir Keir Starmer holds talks with the Chinese president.

The former opposition pro-democracy politicians, social workers, activists and academics are due to be sentenced on Tuesday for conspiring to subvert power through an unofficial “primary” election four years ago.

Members of the public have been queuing to attend their sentencing, which will see them facing up to life in jail.

It is Hong Kong’s largest and longest-running prosecution under the national security law, which was enforced by Beijing and saw months of mass protests, police violence and arrests in 2020 and 2021.

Politics latest: Starmer becomes first PM to meet Xi in almost seven years

Called the “Hong Kong 47” after 47 were charged in January 2021 with conspiracy to commit subversion, 45 of them are set to be sentenced this week after two were acquitted in May this year.

Lord Patten, a patron of British NGO Hong Kong Watch, said the sentences tomorrow will be a “sham” and he called on the prime minister to speak out against them.

Sir Keir met Chinese President Xi Jinping at the G20 summit in Rio on Monday where he told him a “strong UK-China relationship is important for both of our countries”.

The UK PM told reporters on Sunday he intended to pursue a “serious, pragmatic” relationship with Beijing.

Keir Starmer during a bilateral meeting with Xi Jinping.
Pic: PA
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer during a meeting with Xi Jinping in Rio. Pic: PA

Lord Patten said: “The sentencing of 45 of the 47 Hong Kong democrats is not only an affront to the people of Hong Kong, but those who value rights and freedoms around the world.

“These brave individuals were an integral part of defining the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong, and were peacefully supported by thousands through votes.

“I absolutely condemn these sham sentences, which resulted from a non-jury trial and point to the destruction of freedoms of assembly, expression, and the press in Hong Kong.

“The UK government must not allow the results of this case to go unnoticed or uncondemned.”

Read more:
Starmer to push for ‘pragmatic’ relationship with China
Son of jailed HK tycoon Jimmy Lai calls for ‘urgent intervention’ by UK

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

2020 Hong Kong protests: ‘We will never surrender’

Historic meeting between Starmer and Xi

Sir Keir’s meeting with President Xi in Rio is the first of any prime minister in more than six years.

The PM and his foreign secretary, David Lammy, have been critical of China in the past, particularly regarding allegations of human rights abuses against Uyghurs in Xinjiang.

Relations between the UK and China have become frosty over the last decade as the Conservative government spoke out against human rights abuses and concerns grew over national security risks from Chinese investment.

Sir Keir appears to be prioritising trade, with China being Britain’s sixth largest trading partner, accounting for 5% of goods and services trade worth £86.5bn.

The PM’s spokesman said Sir Keir told Mr Xi he wants to “engage honestly and frankly on those areas where we have different perspectives, including on Hong Kong, human rights and Russia’s war in Ukraine”.

Joshua Wong walking to a prison van in March
Image:
Student protest leader turned politician Joshua Wong is one of the Hong Kong 47. Pic: Reuters

Hong Kong 47 in jail for nearly four years

Most of the Hong Kong 47 have been in custody since they were arrested in early 2021.

One of the most famous members of the group is Nobel Peace Prize nominee Joshua Wong, a student protest leader who became leader of the now-disbanded political group Demosisto.

Sixteen of the group pleaded not guilty, with 14 of them convicted after a 118-day trial without a jury. Those found guilty will be sentenced along with 31 who pleaded guilty.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

They were arrested after organising a primary election in July 2020 aiming to help pro-democracy politicians seize a majority in the 2021 Legislative Council elections.

Prosecutors said had they won a majority in the chamber, the democrats were planning to “indiscriminately” veto bills, including the annual budget, which would force the chief executive’s resignation and a government shutdown.

National security judges ruled the move would have plunged Hong Kong into a “constitutional crisis”.

Continue Reading

Trending