Still not sure I understand why if the labour amendment was not called they could not offer to support the SNP motion, or a free vote, it being quite similar to the labour amendment and closer to their new position than the government amendment.
The main thing seems to be how inadequate a process this type of parliamentary process is. You had the spectre of a political party being seen to be fractured when in reality it seemed they now broadly to agree.
This is a debate where precise language is important, yet we're using some massively complex and weaponised process to determine 'parliament's postion'.
Shambles. I have massive sympathy for the speaker in trying to work out the best approach given what appears the very real prospect of danger to sitting MPs. World's gone mad.
Decent run down of how we got here.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/21/how-keir-starmer-averted-gaza-ceasefire-vote-crisis
Still not sure I understand why if the labour amendment was not called they could not offer to support the SNP motion, or a free vote, it being quite similar to the labour amendment and closer to their new position than the government amendment.
The main thing seems to be how inadequate a process this type of parliamentary process is. You had the spectre of a political party being seen to be fractured when in reality it seemed they now broadly to agree.
This is a debate where precise language is important, yet we're using some massively complex and weaponised process to determine 'parliament's postion'.
Shambles. I have massive sympathy for the speaker in trying to work out the best approach given what appears the very real prospect of danger to sitting MPs. World's gone mad.