Order! Orrrderr!!

I caught a bit of the end of yesterday’s debate in the House of Commons on the various proposals for a ceasefire, a humanitarian ceasefire, or a pause or whatever in the Gaza calamity. At the point I caught up with it there was much ado about procedure (or lack of it), the Speaker having allowed another opposition party (Labour) to move an amendment to an SNP Opposition Day motion. Normally only the government would move an amendment to an opposition day motion. On this occasion the government did move an amendment but then withdrew it for no apparent reason. Perhaps they thought it would be a laugh to let the opposition parties slug it out over what precise form a ceasefire in Gaza ought to take. Speaker Hoyle came to the chair to explain his decision, against the clerks’ advice to allow Labour’s amendment. His explanation wasn’t in the least bit convincing and given his multiple apologies, he knew he’d ballsed up. Was this due to Labour pressure to get itself off the hook of another major backbench rebellion against the Labour three line whip to abstain on the SNP motion? Or did the Speaker just wake up thinking he’d create a new procedural precedent? I’m afraid I favour the former view. It can’t be a coincidence that yesterday we heard (in a new biography) of how in his youth Starmer beat up an attacker of a gay friend. He’s a tough man and ruthless with it. One word from him and the Speaker turned to jelly. Separately I’m pleased that on a point of order, a Labour MP criticised Jacob Rees Mogg for suggesting that in one division on his side there had been a vocal shouting of ‘Noes’ which he suggested the Deputy Speaker Rosie Winterton had ignored - the MP noted that he wasn’t even in the chamber at that point. I wonder if the Pompous One felt the slightest blush. I have to say having heard all the points of order and the Speaker’s responses, etc., etc. that somebody from the House of Commons technical department should be despatched down to the Royal Courts of Justice to sort out their audio system. Let’s hear not just how we’re governed, but also how we’re judged (or misgoverned and misjudged, take your pick).