[1andrew1]

I can't see Hoyle surviving this. By his actions, he looks biased, even if there were nobler intentions. So he's lost his authority in the Commons making him ineffective.

Gaza ceasefire vote: Commons debate descends into chaos

A Commons debate on calls for a ceasefire in Gaza descended into chaos, after the Speaker was accused of allowing it to be "hijacked" by Labour.

Sir Lindsay Hoyle sparked fury from the SNP and Conservatives when he broke with convention to allow a vote on a Labour motion for an "immediate humanitarian ceasefire".

The Speaker later apologised, saying he had acted "with the right intentions".

But the SNP said they had been "treated with complete and utter contempt".

Labour's amendment went through to loud shouts of "aye" without a formal vote, after the government said it would not take part in protest.

This meant there was no vote on the SNP's motion, which called for an "immediate ceasefire", and was originally meant to be the focus of the debate.

The government does not have to adopt Labour's position as the vote is not binding.

In extraordinary scenes, SNP MPs and some Tories walked out of the chamber over the Speaker's handling of the vote.

Following calls for him to return to explain his decision, Sir Lindsay told the Commons he chose to allow a vote on the Labour motion so MPs could express their view on "the widest range of propositions".

Amid shouts of resign, he said: "I thought I was doing the right thing and the best thing, and I regret it, and I apologise for how it's ended up.

Sir Lindsay was first elected as a Labour MP but after becoming Speaker he relinquished his party affiliation, as is the convention.

While he said he would meet key MPs from the main parties to discuss what happened, intense pressure remains on the Speaker.

More than 30 Tory and SNP MPs have declared they have no confidence in him by signing an early day motion.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68362405