Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

What happened in the House of Commons tonight?

1000 replies

Bookridden · 21/02/2024 21:19

I'm struggling to understand what is going on and would be grateful is someone can explain to me in simple terms.

Why were Labour worried about the safety of MPs?

Why were the SNP unhappy?

Why were the Tories unhappy?

What's likely to happen next?

Are MPs who don't take a Pro-Palestinian stance really putting their lives at risk?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
34
BigFluffyHoodie · 22/02/2024 18:55

IClaudine · 22/02/2024 18:53

I did not say threats to MPs in the UK were rare. I said murders of MPs in the UK are rare. As are beheadings in the UK.

But if you want to twist it all, fill your boots!

Statistically, murders of MPs in the UK are not rare.

And a lot more are prevented, I'm sure.

EasternStandard · 22/02/2024 18:56

Can’t have it both ways

No excuse for Starmer to push for parliamentary change to avoid a rebellion

Glasgowgal200 · 22/02/2024 18:59

Snp are always unhappy!!!!!!! So what's new

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

Politics
IClaudine · 22/02/2024 18:59

I think Starmer should have allowed a free vote.

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:11

IClaudine · 22/02/2024 18:59

I think Starmer should have allowed a free vote.

The problem there would be that it wouldn't have been a free vote, would it?

If people are making death threats to MPs and that this is enough of a safety issue for the Speaker of the House to break convention (whether he should have or not is irrelevant, the fact is that he was concerned enough to do it), then it is certainly enough to make those MPs vote differently to how they would if they had the choice.

The democratic process has been subverted by the death threats either way.

As for the murder of MPs being 'rare' - there's been two in the last 10 years. There aren't that many MPs, so that's pretty close to home.

EasternStandard · 22/02/2024 19:12

What do we do about votes on this issue?

Just never have them because of a mob making threats

Outside Starmer trying to save his arse this seems an issue

CranfordScones · 22/02/2024 19:15

If you want to know what's going on with Keir Starmer's actions (or lack of them), then you may like to consider the events in Rochdale. We still have the by-election in 7 days' time. Labour has officially withdrawn backing for its candidate, but he'll still appear as 'Labour' on the ballot paper. Without wanting to say as much, Labour will regard it as a vindication if he wins.

Against that backdrop, George Galloway is on manoeuvres with a focus on the constituency's sizeable Muslim population.

At a launch event, he told about 200 people they should abandon Labour over the party's support for Israel and refusal to call for a ceasefire in Gaza.

A big win (or even a strong showing) for Galloway's party will undermine Labour's credentials as the natural home for those with sympathies for the people of Gaza. So, understandably, Starmer doesn't want to be seen to be rocking that particular boat...

HiveSentinelApis · 22/02/2024 19:24

What are the Security services saying at present ?

User8646382 · 22/02/2024 19:29

EasternStandard · 22/02/2024 19:12

What do we do about votes on this issue?

Just never have them because of a mob making threats

Outside Starmer trying to save his arse this seems an issue

Edited

It’s not just about votes, is it? It’s about social workers refusing to investigate code red child protection concerns, the police refusing to investigate crimes, border control refusing to secure the country’s borders.

These people are being told what to do by the government. And there you have the Speaker of the House of Commons telling you that the government is being held to ransom. And somehow this is a conspiracy theory?

This country is finished.

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:33

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:11

The problem there would be that it wouldn't have been a free vote, would it?

If people are making death threats to MPs and that this is enough of a safety issue for the Speaker of the House to break convention (whether he should have or not is irrelevant, the fact is that he was concerned enough to do it), then it is certainly enough to make those MPs vote differently to how they would if they had the choice.

The democratic process has been subverted by the death threats either way.

As for the murder of MPs being 'rare' - there's been two in the last 10 years. There aren't that many MPs, so that's pretty close to home.

Show quote history

We can NOT give in to threats of any kind. This is a very slippery slope.

But, this is not about threats! It’s about Starmer trying to save his capsizing party. The Gaza issue is growing by the day within the Labour Party and it’s about containment. Starmer was leaning on Hoyle to take the pressure off and it’s blown sky high.

It’s outrageous if Hoyle keeps his job, and Starmer should probably resign as well. It’s completely unacceptable.

Abouttimeforanamechange · 22/02/2024 19:34

Yes. They were literally blown up. In Brighton, by the IRA.

John Major's Downing Street was attacked with mortars, in an attempt to assassinate them. Also by the IRA.

And Airey Neave, shadow NI Secretary, was murdered. Escaped Colditz but couldn't escape the IRA.

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:36

We can NOT give in to threats of any kind

Who is "we"? Are you an MP? Otherwise what you're actually saying is THEY should not give in to threats of any kind.

And tbh if someone said to me "you have to suck up risk of death for voting in a particular way" then I'd say "yeah, that's not worth it".

Do we want people to be MPs or not? If we do, then threats need to be taken seriously, not simply glossed over.

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:36

Maybe Starmer did threaten Hoyle. I can’t think why Hoyle - having been warned by his own advisors would ever choose to do this. Knowing the consequences.

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:37

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:36

We can NOT give in to threats of any kind

Who is "we"? Are you an MP? Otherwise what you're actually saying is THEY should not give in to threats of any kind.

And tbh if someone said to me "you have to suck up risk of death for voting in a particular way" then I'd say "yeah, that's not worth it".

Do we want people to be MPs or not? If we do, then threats need to be taken seriously, not simply glossed over.

This is Starmer trying to keep the Labour Party together over Gaza. Stop deflecting.

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:37

Maybe Hoyle was genuinely concerned about the safety of his colleagues. That is is stated reason.

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:37

Nope, because the conservative MPs have the same issues and he did nothing to protect them.

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:38

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:37

This is Starmer trying to keep the Labour Party together over Gaza. Stop deflecting.

Show quote history

That's your opinion.

One would wonder why you would want to shut down discussion of MP safety.

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:39

The Labour Party are imploding over Gaza.
Starmer knew this vote would split them in two just months before an election.

EasternStandard · 22/02/2024 19:39

If people believe the threat part what is the solution?

No votes on any issue that brings threats or something else?

I agree with @Newchapterbeckons on Starmer but wonder what people expect to happen

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:40

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:40

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Ah, there we have it.

Neverpostagain · 22/02/2024 19:41

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:37

Maybe Hoyle was genuinely concerned about the safety of his colleagues. That is is stated reason.

No it's because he is a former labour MP.

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:43

noblegiraffe · 22/02/2024 19:40

Ah, there we have it.

Show quote history

The lies need to stop, it’s doing more harm than good, the Labour Party have been caught out. Now they are frantically grasping at excuses for the unacceptable bullying of the speaker of the house. Assuming he didn’t volunteer to compromise his impartiality in this way…

Newchapterbeckons · 22/02/2024 19:44

Neverpostagain · 22/02/2024 19:41

No it's because he is a former labour MP.

Show quote history

Exactly. He needs to resign.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.