I WONDER if the Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, realises just what he did on Wednesday at PMQs when he denied Diane Abbott MP the opportunity to pose a question. Ignoring the victim, having others speak out, speak up, and not have the victim use the “R” word? But thank you Stephen Flynn. I do believe the aggressor Frank Hester incited violence, racial violence, so why silence the target? How condescending, how ignorant on Hoyle’s part, or was he nobbled again, this time to spare Tory discomfort? Was this his effort at parity?
We know Diane Abbott as a trailblazer: the first black female MP, from 1987 to now, never overshadowed by her two male Labour counterparts – the late Bernie Grant and Paul Boateng – whilst long outstaying them. Oh, by the way, none of the three was the very first. The first black MP in Westminster was Peter McLagan, Liberal MP for Linlithgowshire, 1865-93. Yes, Linlithgowshire, Scotland. McLagan is now virtually forgotten whilst the racism, the threats Ms Abbott experiences, are almost legendary.
READ MORE: Stephen Flynn tells Speaker to quit after Diane Abbott snub
Amnesty International investigated online abuse against women MPs in the run-up to the 2017 General Election. It concluded that Diane Abbott received an “incredibly disproportionate amount of abuse and was the target of almost a third (31.61%) of all abusive tweets analysed”. There was evidence of an average of 51 abusive tweets per day over the 158-day study often focused on her gender and race, including threats of sexual violence. Oh, and the second MP in this infamous hate-threat-fuelled line-up? Joanna Cherry!
In the round, these last few days highlight the inherent racism within the Tory party, and its Janus-like positioning. The PM stood outside No 10 pontificating on his party’s view of alleged extremists’ threats to democracy but seemingly unaware of the irony of the extreme measures the Tories would like to introduce. This was swiftly followed by his and his party’s inability to own the racism evidenced by Frank Hester.
READ MORE: 'Institutional racism': Fury as Speaker IGNORES Diane Abbott despite Tory donor row
But it has also shown up so-called values being expressed. Sir Hoyle, you silenced the victim whilst enabling greater play was focussed on the perpetrator: he has apologised after all, apparently contrite “for being rude”. And Labour? You may be shouting equally loudly over Hester, but you’ve placed additional spin and prominence on the donations given by him. No official reaching out to Diane Abbott, a Labour MP – albeit one without the whip. Shame on you Labour for putting the money before the victim.
And to round it off? The thought that all of this plays into the rise of the far right, hidden in plain sight, their followers and the votes they’ll receive across the political spectrum in the forthcoming election. Still, we know they’re “not racists but…”
Selma Rahman
Edinburgh
THE spectacle being acted out in Westminster on Wednesday was deeply shaming of the British establishment. The central act – for (mainly) white men to be speaking about the insulting behaviour towards Dianne Abbott without allowing her to speak – was deeply racist.
READ MORE: Minister defends Tory donor accused of making 'racist' comment about Diane Abbott
Racism involves the dehumanising of people (both the racist and the target for misrecognition). To speak about threats directed towards a fellow human being without her being accorded a voice is an attempt to infantilise and dehumanise her.
We need to dwell on this collective insult before moving on to the broader political manipulations taking place in this pre-election period.
Cathie Lloyd
via email
ONCE again Lesley Riddoch has told us how it is in the Westminster Hall of bullshitters and truth-sayers. An excellent piece in Thursday’s National about what happened in the House of Commons the day before (PMQs exposes farce of Westminster – the SNP need a strategy if they’re to remain, Mar 14).
A BBC political reporter reckoned Diane Abbott bounced up to try and speak 36 times. Lesley’s count was 46. And still Speaker Hoyle refused to recognise her struggle or even perhaps her existence.
Hoyle certainly did the same with Stephen Flynn and his proposal about Gaza several days ago.
READ MORE: Tory Party 'undoubtedly institutionally Islamophobic', Humza Yousaf says
And who has been accused of cuddling up to Hoyle behind the scenes? Keir Starmer of course, in efforts to save his own despicable face.
But back to Frank Hester and his racist attack on Diane Abbott. On some news reports Stephen Flynn’s reply to Sunak’s petty apology response was played in full, but one BBC report cut out the “bloody dangerous” bit. In case you missed it, Lesley Riddoch copied it in full.
Stephen Flynn referred to Hester as a “gentleman”. Personally I wouldn’t give Hester the time of day, the same as I think Hoyle doesn’t deserve his “Knight of the Realm” title.
But I digress. Flynn said: “The gentleman in question apologised for being rude. No, he wasn’t rude, he was racist, he was odious and he was downright bloody dangerous”. No pussyfooting around the Commons with him, as Lesley Riddoch put it.
Stephen Flynn might well get himself re-elected come the Westminster Parliament election. But would he stand against Humza Yousaf in the Scottish election in a few years’ time? He would certainly get my vote.
Alan Magnus-Bennett
Fife
THE US are sending aid and facilities for berthing to Gaza by ship. Surely it would be more economic to use those ships already delivering weapons to Israel to also carry the aid items, in an even-handed and economic sort of way. They could drop off the artillery at the port of Ashdod then nip round to the Gaza shoreline for the humanitarian bit (then get out as soon as possible!).
Peter Barjonas
Caithness
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