PARLIAMENT returned this week after the Christmas break. And what a week it was. As is par for the course these days, the Government lost two big votes, there was a huge bust up between the Tory benches and the Speaker, and Government ministers spoke about how amazing the Prime Minister’s Brexit deal is, while basically everybody else told them why they were wrong.
I myself had the opportunity to speak in the so-called meaningful vote debate on Thursday but, as ever, my contribution and the contributions of my SNP colleagues was met with heckling by the Tory backbenchers and ignored by the Government ministers.
In my speech on Thursday I touched on how misleading the Prime Minister has been when arguing that the choice is only between her deal and no deal. I know that during one of her many statements from the podium at Number 10, that the choices were actually her deal, no deal or no Brexit, but she seems to have forgotten the no Brexit part lately. This isn’t the only way the Prime Minister has been misleading on Brexit, however. It is important to remember that this is the same Prime Minister who told us that no deal is better than a bad deal.
The same Prime Minister that told us we could continue frictionless tariff-free trade with the EU while abandoning free movement. This is the same Prime Minister who told everyone that free movement is ending and that this is a great victory – to be clear, the ending of free movement will be a complete disaster for Scotland and our economy. Every time this Prime Minister addresses the public about Brexit she misleads. For that reason alone, the decision on what to do next should be taken back to the electorate.
The Tories were particularly outraged this week when the Speaker accepted an amendment which, if passed by the House of Commons, would force the Government to return to Parliament, if the deal is voted down, with a plan B within three days instead of the 21 days that were inscribed in the Article 50 legislation as it stood.
I voted in favour of that amendment and I am very glad to say it passed. It has to be noted though, the complete brass neck of the Tories complaining about Parliament getting a say in how Brexit takes shape, when they have been preaching about the UK Parliament taking back control from Brussels for years.
My irony limit was reached when the Tory across from me was angrily on his feet, screaming, “Publish it!” at the Speaker when asked if he had any advice on whether he could accept the amendment or not. This is the very government that were held in contempt for refusing to publish their own legal advice to Parliament!
The whole charade was completely emblematic of what the Tories in the age of Brexit are all about – claim that you care that Parliament has a say, then complain when Parliament has a say that’s different from yours.
It seems to me that for the Tory Brexiteers, it’s not about Parliament being sovereign and “taking back control from the EU”, it’s about keeping the Tories in control.
While all this was going on, Labour were asking for a General Election while refusing to put forward a motion of no confidence. This strange conundrum with Labour really makes you question if they actually want a General Election at all, or if they’re just posturing so they can pretend they didn’t support Brexit when it turns out to be truly terrible for the people they claim to represent. Surely not … Labour would never ever ever be so sleekit ...
One good thing did happen this week. The Tories finally U-turned on the two-child cap. Kind of. The proposed extension to make the two-child cap apply to all families, and not just those born after April 6 2017, is to be abandoned. Of course, this does nothing for families with children born after that date, but at least they’re showing a tiny bit of sense. For three years my colleague Alison Thewliss MP has been fighting this cause with passion rarely seen in politics, and I am so extremely glad to see some results finally taking shape from her hard work. We will continue taking the fight to the Tories on their terrible social security policies. Almost a decade on, austerity has done huge harm to countless families and individuals and while it isn’t possible for us to stop the Tories continuing this altogether, even small victories like these will have a huge impact for those suffering.
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