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?
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
Related Topics:
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.
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.
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
1:19
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
0:53
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.
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
1:01
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.
The family of a dog walker killed by a psychiatric patient say they have been ‘treated like dirt’ by the NHS after learning his attacker has been granted permission to leave hospital.
Lewis Stone was stabbed to death by David Fleet in a random attack in Borth, Wales, in 2019, shortly after Mr Fleet had been released into the community.
Mr Stone’s family were informed of the update to his care just hours after Sky News aired their first TV interview calling for an internal NHSTrust report into its handling of Fleet’s case to be released.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:11
From 10 April: Victim’s family demand answers over killer’s NHS care
Mr Stone’s stepdaughter, Vicki Lindsay, told Sky News: “As victims, we have been treated disgracefully.
“We still do not know why the killer was released 10 days before he attacked Lewis, who made that decision and why, and who is going to be held accountable for it.
“But as if all that were not bad enough, only six years on, we now get to live knowing that the killer is now allowed out at night time.”
Ms Lindsay also told Sky’s Sarah-Jane Mee that “my biggest fear is that it’s going to happen again – I can’t sleep at night thinking about other families going through what we’ve gone through”.
More on Wales
Related Topics:
Mr Fleet was sectioned under the Mental Health Act after admitting manslaughter with diminished responsibility.
He was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia at the time of the attack and told psychiatrists that if he had not stabbed Mr Stone, the voices in his head “were going to kill him”.
Image: Lewis Stone was fatally stabbed in February 2019
Patients who have committed a mental health-related homicide can be granted permission to leave their hospital under Section 17 of the Mental Health Act.
It is considered part of the patient’s rehabilitation and preparation for eventual discharge.
What has the MoJ said?
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “We understand this decision will be difficult for the Stone family, and our thoughts are with them.
“Any decision to approve access to the community is only made after a thorough risk assessment and with strict safeguards in place.”
Image: Lewis Stone with his granddaughter Sammy
The Hywel Dda health board says it does not intend to release an internal report into Fleet’s care.
Sharon Daniel, the interim executive director for nursing, quality and patient experience, said: “The duty of candour for patients came into force in Wales in April 2023.
“At the time of this incident and concern, we fulfilled our duties to be open.”
A senior NHS official has called the decision not to release the internal report “callous and uncaring”. Speaking on condition of anonymity, they said: “On the face of it, this family has been failed multiple times over.
“Of course, there is a balance to be struck between the rights of the family and the rights of the person detained, but the basic lack of transparency and consideration here undermines the duty of candour.”
Freedom of Information requests made by the victim’s support organisation Hundred Families have found that nearly 400 people were killed by former mental health patients between 2018 and 2023.
However, this number is expected to be a significant underestimate as a quarter of NHS Mental Health Trusts refused to say how many of their patients went on to kill, as they don’t want to risk identifying offenders.
Julian Hendy, who founded Hundred Families, said: “Unfortunately the family of Lewis Stone is not alone. There is a terrible lack of openness and transparency and that needs to change.
“The public needs to know that mental health services are keeping people safe and learning effectively when things go wrong.
“At the moment, by failing to share information the public cannot be reassured.”
On Tuesday, Rehman pleaded guilty to causing death by dangerous driving in his Mercedes Sprinter van.
Prosecutor Rachel Shenton told Manchester Crown Court that he had visited two massage parlours in the city hours before.
She added he had taken “at least 20 lines of cocaine” in seven hours.
Judge Alan Conrad KC heard it was the prosecution’s case that Rehman’s drug consumption adversely affected his driving.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said in a statement that Rehman ignored stop signs and gave the tram driver no time to react before it struck the side of the van, which then mounted the pavement.
Abbie Clarke, senior crown prosecutor for CPS North West, said: “It is clear his driving fell far short of what is expected of a competent and careful driver.
“Rehman failed to take responsibility for his actions. He fled the scene in a taxi and denied that he drove dangerously in interview, only accepting responsibility on his third hearing before the court.
“He must now face the consequences for his role in this wholly avoidable tragedy.”
Rehman was previously jailed in 2017 for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by burning a car involved in a fatal hit-and-run collision, which killed a 25-year-old man in Chorlton.
He has been remanded in custody until sentencing on 27 May.
Britain’s economy will be among the hardest hit by the global trade war and inflation is set to climb, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned – as it slashed its UK growth forecast by a third.
In a sobering set of projections, the Washington-based organisation said it was grappling with “extremely high levels of policy uncertainty” – and the global economy would slow even if countries manage to negotiate a permanent reduction in tariffs from the US.
Echoing earlier warnings about the risks to the global financial system, the IMF said stock markets could fall even more sharply than they did in the aftermath of Donald Trump‘s “Liberation Day” tariffs announcement, when US and UK indices recorded some of their largest one-day falls since the pandemic.
It comes as Chancellor Rachel Reeves prepares to meet her US counterpart Scott Bessent at the IMF’s spring gathering in Washington this week.
She is hoping to negotiate a reduction to the 10% baseline tariff the US president has applied to all UK goods. Steel, aluminium and car exports face an additional 25% tariff.
As long as the world’s two largest economies are at war with each other, there will be considerable spillovers. The US and China account for 43% of the global economy.
If demand in either nation slows, that has ripple effects across the world. Tariff or no tariff, exporters to those markets will be hurt.
If China redirects its goods elsewhere, that could hurt domestic industries – jobs could be at stake.
US and Chinese investors might hit pause on global projects and stock market devaluations could hurt consumer confidence. Things could unravel quickly.
Against that backdrop, it is difficult to say with any certainty what would happen to the UK but, even if we find a way to sweet talk our way out of tariffs, the dark clouds of the global economy are moving in every direction.
Britain is an open and highly trade-sensitive economy (we have a trade-to-GDP ratio of around 65%) and global spillovers will rain on us.
Then there are the spillovers from the financial markets. The IMF warned that rising government borrowing costs were weighing on economic growth.
While rising UK bond yields are, in part, a reflection of investor unease over the UK’s growth and inflation outlook, they also reflect anxiety over the US trajectory.
It’s worth bearing all of this in mind if Chancellor Rachel Reeves emerges from her trip to Washington with a deal.
The Treasury would no doubt celebrate the achievement. After all, a reduction in tariffs could make a big difference to some industries, especially our car manufacturers who are currently grappling with a 25% levy on goods to their largest export market. However, it would not solve our problems.
In fact, it would barely make a difference to our overall GDP. Back in 2020, the government estimated that a free trade deal with the US would boost the UK economy by just 0.16% over the next 15 years.
And overall GDP does matter. The chancellor desperately needs economic growth to support the country’s ailing public finances (when the economy grows, so do government tax receipts).
She will know better than most that the prize the US has to offer is comparatively small, so she should weigh up the costs of any deal carefully.
The IMF presented a range of forecasts in its latest World Economic Outlook. Its main case looked at the period up to 4 April, after Mr Trump announced sweeping tariffs on countries across the world, ratcheting up US protectionism to its highest level in a century.
If the president were to revert to this policy framework, global growth would fall from 3.3% last year to 2.8% this year, before recovering to 3% in 2026.
In January, the IMF was predicting a rate of 3.3% for both years.
Nearly all countries were hit with downgrades, with the US expected to grow by just 1.8% this year, a downgrade of 0.9 percentage points.
Mexico was downgraded by 1.7 percentage points, while China and Canada are forecast to slow by 0.6 percentage points and Japan by 0.5 percentage points.
The UK economy is expected to grow by just 1.1% this year, down 0.5 percentage points from the 1.6% the IMF was predicting in January. Growth picks up to 1.4% next year, still 0.1 percentage points lower than the January forecast.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:22
Will tariffs hit UK growth?
Along with recent tariff announcements, the IMF blamed the UK’s poor performance on a rise in government borrowing costs, which has in part been triggered by growing unease among investors over the fate of the US economy.
When borrowing costs rise, the chancellor has to rein in public spending or raise taxes to meet her fiscal rules. That can weigh on economic growth.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:07
Trump: Tariffs are making US ‘rich’
It also pointed to problems in the domestic economy, mainly “weaker private consumption amid higher inflation as a result of regulated prices and energy costs”.
In a blow to the chancellor, the IMF warned that the UK would experience one of the largest upticks in inflation because of utility bill increases that took effect in April.
It upgraded its inflation forecast by 0.7 percentage points to 3.1% for 2025, taking it even higher above the Bank of England’s 2% target and deepening the dilemma for central bankers who are also grappling with weak growth.
Meanwhile, inflation in the US is likely to jump one percentage point higher than previously forecast to 3% in 2025 on the back of higher tariffs.
The IMF forecast period ended on 4 April. That was before the US president paused his reciprocal tariffs on countries across the world while ratcheting up levies on China.
In a worrying sign for finance ministers across the world, as they attempt to negotiate a deal with the US administration, the IMF said the global economy would slow just the same if Mr Trump were to make his temporary pause on reciprocal tariffs permanent.
That is because higher tariffs between the US and China, which together account for 43% of the global economy, would have spillover effects on the rest of the world that offset the benefits to individual countries.
“The gains from lower effective tariff rates for those countries that were previously subject to higher tariffs would now be offset by poorer growth outcomes in China and the United States – due to the escalating tariff rates – that would propagate through global supply chains,” the IMF said.
In response, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said:
“This forecast shows that the UK is still the fastest-growing European G7 country. The IMF have recognised that this government is delivering reform which will drive up long-term growth in the UK, through our plan for change.
“The report also clearly shows that the world has changed, which is why I will be in Washington this week defending British interests and making the case for free and fair trade.”