Sir Lindsay Hoyle has rebuked an SNP MP who shared the Commons Speaker’s correspondence on social media platform Twitter.
Sir Lindsay called on Ochil and South Perthshire MP John Nicolson to apologise for posting part of his letter relating to a decision on referring Conservative former culture secretary Nadine Dorries to the Privileges Committee.
Making a statement in the chamber following PMQs, the Speaker said: “(He) has seen fit to give a partial and biased account of my letter on Twitter and I await his apology… It is not the way we should be doing business in this House.”
Responding, Mr Nicolson said: “I want to put on record that I deplore social media pile-ons against you or indeed anyone else. I’ve been on the receiving end of them and they’re exceedingly unpleasant.
“But could I ask for guidance on what I and other members should tell their constituents about integrity in politics in this context? If someone misleads a committee, what should happen next?”
Sir Lindsay replied: “Printing the letter but only half the letter is not integrity – in fact, far from it.
“It misled the people of this country, it certainly put me in a bad light with the people of this country, and I don’t expect that to happen – an impartial Speaker – so if that was an apology I don’t think it was very good.”
Intervening, Conservative former Cabinet minister David Davis said: “There is a duty of upholding the institutions of this House. Clearly, in breaching the confidentiality of the Speaker’s private correspondence, the MP for Ochil and South Perthshire has knowingly broken that rule and… if that was an apology, that was not sufficient.”
He claimed: “You (Speaker) were simply following the conventions of agreeing with the DCMS Select Committee of which he (Mr Nicolson) is a member. When they decided not to refer, there was no minority report from him, there was not even a vote against from him.
“It was a unanimous vote so what he was trying to do was to blame you by his partial release of this letter and he was leading the public to believe that somehow you made this decision against the wishes of the committee.”
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