JACOB Rees-Mogg called Pete Wishart a “tim’rous beastie” when the two men clashed in a Commons exchange yesterday.
The long serving MP – who held his seat by 21 votes in the 2017 election – described the “terrible” start to the Government’s business as he pressed the Tory on snap election plans.
Wishart, shadow leader of the House, listed the Government defeats, poked fun at the Leader of the House for lying down during a debate and took issue with the purging of 21 Tory MPs from the party for rebelling. He also underlined the win for the opposition parties after the Lords agreed to push through a bill requiring the PM to seek a new Brexit extension. Johnson had called it a “surrender bill”.
Wishart said: “I congratulate the Leader of the House on an incredible week – not on becoming an internet sensation with his ‘Victorian dad lying down’ stuff, but on his shrewd, stellar and steady management of the House business. He has managed to lose every single vote for this Prime Minister.
READ MORE: Defeated Boris Johnson to visit Scotland after bad week of Brexit turmoil
“He has managed to lose his Government majority by deselecting decent and honourable members of his party.
“He has lost control of the business of the House, and last night his unelected Lords in the other place put up the white flag to what they call the surrender bill. In the last few hours, we have had the resignation of the right hon member for Orpington (Jo Johnson) in his desire to spend less time with his family.”
Rees-Mogg drew inspiration from Burns’ poem To A Mouse as he mocked Wishart for not voting for a snap election. He said: “What we have seen today is, I think in history, unprecedented, unknown and unseen. We have seen a frightened Scotsman.
“They are people who are known for their courage, their forthrightness and their sturdiness, and they are scared of going in front of their voters. They have run away from an election. They are — what is it? — ‘tim’rous beasties’ – I think they must be called, who dare not face their voters. I just wonder whether that is because of the narrow majority that the Honourable Gentleman has?”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel