THE SNP and other opposition parties have this morning tabled a no-confidence motion in Theresa May’s Government after Labour failed to do so.
However, parliamentary convention says that the sitting administration only has to give parliamentary time for such a motion to be debated and voted upon in the Commons if it is tabled by the official Opposition because, in theory, it has the ability to form an alternative administration. Such an obligation does not extend to a third or fourth party.
So the attempt by the Nationalists together with the Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru and the Greens to get a parliamentary debate and vote on the Tory Government’s future is set to fail.
Labour has not tabled a no-confidence motion in the Government so far because it fears it would not succeed in sparking a general election given the anti-EU Brexiteer Tories and the Democratic Unionists have made clear they would support Mrs May’s administration in such a vote. Jeremy Corbyn has set his sights on triggering it after the PM’s Brexit deal is expected to be voted down next month.
Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, said: “If the official Opposition won't do its job, the real opposition will.”
Yesterday during an emergency debate on the proposed UK-EU deal, the Highland MP branded Mr Corbyn "the midwife for Brexit" for failing to call a no-confidence vote in the Government as he confirmed the SNP had abandoned its support for the Norway-Plus option and was swinging behind a People’s Vote.
Mr Blackford accused the Labour leader of having ducked the issue with his "embarrassing stunt" of calling for a confidence vote in the Prime Minister rather than the Government as a whole.
Focusing on Mrs May rather than her administration means again there is no legal requirement on the Government, which controls Commons business, to allow parliamentary time for a debate and vote on the issue.
The SNP leader told MPs: "The Leader of the Opposition has become the midwife for Brexit; he is letting the Government off the hook.”
The Highland MP described Mr Corbyn’s motion as an embarrassing “stunt” and pleaded with the Labour leader to “unite” and work on a cross-party basis with the SNP, the Lib Dems, Plaid and the Greens.
However, while there are behind-the-scenes talks between Labour and the Nationalists taking place at Westminster to see how they could coalesce behind an alternative to the PM’s Brexit Plan, it is hard to see how Mr Blackford’s outspoken attack on the Labour leadership and the putting down of the cross-party motion will help this cause.
As the SNP leader rose to speak in the debate, he was barracked from the Conservative benches with one MP being heard to say: “Get back to the Isle of Skye.”
Mr Blackford, the local MP, hit back angrily, saying such remarks displayed “ignorance and arrogance by so-called honourable members” from the Conservative benches.
Later, in response to Anna Soubry, the Tory Remainer, the Highland MP said, in relation to the Norway-Plus option, that “that ship has now sailed and we ought to be staying in the EU; that is the best option and we should be putting that to the people”.
This change confirmed the Nationalists’ shift in policy, reported by The Herald two weeks ago, when the SNP leader said his party was swinging fully behind a People’s Vote as the “best option”.
Later, Steve Barclay, the Brexit Secretary, claimed there was “broad support” across the House for much of the PM’s Brexit Plan, which he described as the “right deal” for the country.
But Sir Keir Starmer for Labour accused the Government of a “reckless” approach by “running down the clock to put maximum pressure on MPs to face what they will present as a binary choice between the deal that is before us...and no-deal”.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel