THE SNP and the Tories are working together to get rid of Speaker Lindsay Hoyle amid a major row over the opposition day ceasefire motion, according to reports.
On Wednesday afternoon, Hoyle announced rules would be changed for the first time ever by selecting both UK Government and Labour amendments as MPs were set to debate the SNP's ceasefire motion - ultimately saving Labour from a rebellion threat.
It is the first time in Westminster's history that this has occurred on an Opposition Day, the clerk of the House has confirmed - calling it a "departure from long-established convention".
This sparked anger from both the SNP and the Tories, with reports that they are set to work together to oust him as Speaker.
READ MORE: LIVE UPDATES: Fury as Speaker changes rules for SNP's Gaza ceasefire debate
Tory MP William Wragg has now tabled a no-confidence motion in Hoyle, with reports that the SNP will lend the motion their backing.
Two SNP frontbenchers, meanwhile, deny the reports and told The National that they aren't going to work with the Tories to get rid of Hoyle.
It comes as Tory MPs told a Sky News reporter that Keir Starmer and the Labour chief whip Alan Campbell threatened to remove Lindsay Hoyle as speaker during behind the scenes talks if he didn't select Labour's amendment.
Senior Labour figures also reportedly told BBC Newsnight's political editor that Hoyle was left in "no doubt" that Labour would vote him out of his role as Speaker after the general election unless he called the amendment.
A Labour spokesperson dismissed the allegations as "completely untrue".
The Speaker faced calls of “bring back Bercow” after he made the shock decision ahead of the Commons debate on a ceasefire in Gaza.
Alongside the calls for him to be replaced by his predecessor Joh Bercow, the Commons Speaker faced calls of “shame on you”, and shouts that he should resign, as well as clapping from the SNP, an action not allowed in the Commons chamber.
The Speaker said he took the decision in order to give MPs the “widest possible range” of options in the Gaza ceasefire debate because of its importance.
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