There is one other aspect of this that is extremely troubling, namely that the speaker sought to (partially) justify his decision on the grounds that this would improve the security of members - apparently, a vote for the wrong motion would have increased the risk of terrorist attacks on MPs who voted the wrong way. Whether this is a realistic fear or not, it is totally unacceptable that proceedings in the House of Commons should be influenced by such considerations. If this point were to be conceded even once, it would be the thin end of a wedge which would seriously damage our democracy. On these grounds alone, Sir Lindsay is not fit for purpose.
Certainly, as the Speaker admits, he made the wrong call and decision. Not only did he deny the SNP - a party I have no respect for - the opportunity to debate and put to the vote their resolution but also he has very seriously damaged the reputation of the U.K. Parliament by helping to generate and foment the chaotic scenes we saw plus the image of a Parliament that can no longer function freely and in accordance with its own rules for - in the speaker’s mind - fear of violence towards its members. All of this was unnecessary and, with respect, only happened because while Lindsay Hoyle is a decent and well meaning man, he’s also clearly not the brightest spark on the circuit!
I assume that Simon isn’t suggesting that the SNP forfeited their right to an Opposition Day motion because they were out to cause trouble for both the speaker’s and the deputy speaker’s - she of the “poor hearing”! - party?
There is one other aspect of this that is extremely troubling, namely that the speaker sought to (partially) justify his decision on the grounds that this would improve the security of members - apparently, a vote for the wrong motion would have increased the risk of terrorist attacks on MPs who voted the wrong way. Whether this is a realistic fear or not, it is totally unacceptable that proceedings in the House of Commons should be influenced by such considerations. If this point were to be conceded even once, it would be the thin end of a wedge which would seriously damage our democracy. On these grounds alone, Sir Lindsay is not fit for purpose.
Certainly, as the Speaker admits, he made the wrong call and decision. Not only did he deny the SNP - a party I have no respect for - the opportunity to debate and put to the vote their resolution but also he has very seriously damaged the reputation of the U.K. Parliament by helping to generate and foment the chaotic scenes we saw plus the image of a Parliament that can no longer function freely and in accordance with its own rules for - in the speaker’s mind - fear of violence towards its members. All of this was unnecessary and, with respect, only happened because while Lindsay Hoyle is a decent and well meaning man, he’s also clearly not the brightest spark on the circuit!
I assume that Simon isn’t suggesting that the SNP forfeited their right to an Opposition Day motion because they were out to cause trouble for both the speaker’s and the deputy speaker’s - she of the “poor hearing”! - party?