FIRST Minister Humza Yousaf has called Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle’s position “untenable”.
It comes after SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn called for a vote of no confidence in Hoyle as a result of his handling of the Gaza vote.
Hoyle is fighting for his job after being forced to apologise for breaking with “long-established convention” to allow a debate on a Labour amendment to an SNP opposition day motion. More than 50 members have signed a motion of no confidence in him.
Speaking to journalists following FMQs on Thursday, Yousaf was asked if the Speaker should go.
READ MORE: Keir Starmer breaks silence amid Speaker threat claims
He replied: “As Stephen (Flynn) my colleague has said, he has serious questions to answer. His position looks to me to be untenable."
The SNP leader said his party had been consistent in its approach to the Israel-Hamas war and he continues to have family in Gaza who are “suffering”.
He told journalists: “I don’t think it’s unreasonable for an opposition party on opposition day to want to have their motion debated, discussed and voted on.
“We know the Speaker looks like he has bent the rules and he has serious questions to answer. That’s why Stephen Flynn is absolutely right in saying that his position doesn’t seem tenable.”
He said nearly 30,000 people had died in Gaza and the international community should “exert every ounce of pressure they can” for an immediate ceasefire.
“What we saw was frankly disgraceful, chaotic scenes in the House of Commons. And I think the true tragedy of that is that it takes away from what is the most important issue and that is the fact that we have an absolute humanitarian catastrophe that has unfolded and is deepening in Gaza.”
Scottish Conservative leader and MP Douglas Ross has said the trust in Hoyle has been “eroded” following the vote on a Gaza ceasefire.
Ross said the Speaker had “an awful lot of work to do” to rebuild the confidence of MPs, adding: “I am going to reflect on the discussions that the Speaker has with party leaders and with chief whips.
“But I don’t think anyone should understate the seriousness of the situation and the trust that has been eroded from someone who I like and respect and have worked well with, the Speaker of the House.
“You can only remain in that position if you have the confidence of the whole House, and I believe, as many others do, that there is an awful lot of work to do to build that confidence.”
Ross said he thought the scenes in Westminster “did not reflect well on any of the parties involved” - “But I think crucially, the Speaker accepted the mistake he made – and it was a mistake.”
READ MORE: MPs sign no confidence motion in Speaker - see the full list
It comes after the Speaker apologised again to SNP members.
Responding to Flynn, who said he had no confidence in the Speaker, Hoyle told the Commons: “I will reiterate I made a judgement call that didn’t end up in the position where I expected it to.
“I regret it. I apologise to the SNP… I apologise and I apologise to the House. I made a mistake. We do make mistakes. I own up to mine.
“I would say that we can have an SO24 (Standing Order 24) to get an immediate debate because the debate is so important to this House."
Both Tory and SNP MPs were left furious at the decision, with senior minister Penny Mordaunt giving a special statement in which she claimed Hoyle had “undermined” the House of Commons and said the Government would be boycotting the vote on a Gaza ceasefire as a result.
Labour’s amendment then passed without opposition, with the Speaker confirming he is to hold talks with party leaders to explain his decision.
Keir Starmer has said that he “simply urged” Hoyle to have “the broadest possible debate” by putting a number of options in front of MPs during the Gaza ceasefire debate.
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