or the snp it— amendment than either labour or the snp.ed. we talk about the need to -et needed. we talk about the need to get aid _ needed. we talk about the need to get aid into civilians who are hungry— get aid into civilians who are hungry and thirsty and don't have medicai— hungry and thirsty and don't have medical supplies. so, iwould hungry and thirsty and don't have medical supplies. so, i would like to hear— medical supplies. so, i would like to hear from the speaker, whether or not amendments like ours could be heard _ not amendments like ours could be heard in— not amendments like ours could be heard in the future. in not amendments like ours could be heard in the future.— heard in the future. in fairness to the snp, it _ heard in the future. in fairness to the snp, it was — heard in the future. in fairness to the snp, it was their _ heard in the future. in fairness to the snp, it was their opposition i the snp, it was their opposition day, which they feel has been hijacked. if this was delivered democrats and this is happened t

and that's snp have asked that's why the snp have asked that's why the snp have asked that debate.ck in november resulted in in several, i think, maybe eight resignations from the labour front bench because mps voted or they couldn't support , voted or they couldn't support, or they were forced in a position where they had to almost support what the snp was saying. that's not where saying. and that's not where they it to be. they had to they want it to be. they had to resign. what's happened today and it's complicated. what simply that simply what's happened is that speaker has allowed speaker bercow has allowed a second amendment to the snp motion outside of the government's own amendment, which means that it gives a labour mps a get out to avoid having to basically resign if they couldn't support what the what the snp was saying. it's a real, real issue . um, fury from real, real issue. um, fury from the government side, someone saying bercow s to me, a minister i've been with in the commons in the past half an hour or so, um, said to me any last semblance of impartiality from th

as it was and particularly the snp were ultimately unable _ particularly the snp were ultimately unablethe snp were ultimately unable to vote on their proposition. i unable to vote on their proposition. lam, _ unable to vote on their proposition. lam. and _ unable to vote on their proposition. lam. and i— unable to vote on their proposition. iam, and i regret, that it has ended— iam, and i regret, that it has ended up— iam, and i regret, that it has ended up like that in this position, that was— ended up like that in this position, that was never my intention for it to end _ that was never my intention for it to end up — that was never my intention for it to end up like this. i was absolutely convinced that the decision— absolutely convinced that the decision was done with the right intentions. the decision was done with the right intentions. ,, , ., ~ decision was done with the right intention— decision was done with the right intentions. ,, , ., ~ ., ., , intentions. the speaker of the house there, sir lindsay _ intentions. the speaker of the house there, sir lindsay hoyle. _ intentio

vote to >> that was when the snp vote to go through. >> snp go through. >> you want the snp vote to go. all right. and are you disappointed with what you've there. you want an you've seen there. you want an immediate i take immediate ceasefire now? i take it like the the it i don't like the way that the speaker has changed the order. >> unprecedented . and he's >> it's unprecedented. and he's made labour go first, whereas the snp , uh, put in the motion. the snp, uh, put in the motion. so i don't know why he's done that. so i don't know why he's done that . and i want an explanation . that. and i want an explanation. >> just, just some people are saying that it doesn't really matter what does matter today because it's not going impact because it's not going to impact what happens it's not what happens, because it's not necessarily going to impact what happens you r espond? respond? >> does it matter ? it shows what >> does it matter? it shows what the want. that's what the people want. that's what matters. it shows a sign matters. and it it shows a sign to beau biden and everyone else,

i think the snp mps this evening? i think the snp mps thought _ mps this evening?hought the whole procedure | mps this evening? i think the snp - mps thought the whole procedure was absurd. what snp mps did was they went to the lobby, that is the rooms beside the main parliamentary debating chamber, ready to vote and they were anticipating and expecting there would be a vote and i think snp mps, notjust those but mps across the chamber, wanted the chance to vote unto a number of mps across party said they wanted their constituents to know where they stood on this and the problem with the shenanigans today was that mps were not allowed to express their views in the lobbies and to vote. but they would have been had the government and the snp, your colleagues, not walked out because under the original ruling of the speaker, the labour motion, your motion, i beg your pardon, would have been voted on to eventually, and it's a complicated... not get into it, the original ruling, your motion would have been voted on. eventually it would but the problem was the government

and what does the snp do? i'm clear the snp do?ht more, right now. you might know more, jacob, snp to put a vote jacob, if the snp to put a vote forward of no confidence in the speaker of the house of commons, what happens then? can't what happens then? i can't remember happening remember this happening before i recall , um, when speaker michael recall, um, when speaker michael martin quit over his handling of the mp expenses scandal back in 2009, there was loose talk of an edm and that was enough to force him out . now that edm edm and that was enough to force him out. now that edm has already gone down from your colleague william wragg , now colleague william wragg, now he's chairman of the parliamentary of the public administration and constitutional affairs committee. put down committee. he's put down essentially, um , a petition for essentially, um, a petition for other mps to sign. it has no other mps to sign. it has no other force than that. but just the fact that an edm went down in speaker michael martin, 5 or 6 sided, and

as i say, _ been raised by the snp chief whip. as i say, i— been raised by the snp chief whip.as i say, i have made a judgment on a president that has been done before, — a president that has been done before, i— a president that has been done before, i have viewed it —— not precedentm _ before, i have viewed it —— not precedent... i am going to stand by the ruling _ precedent... i am going to stand by the ruling and i will not take... brand — the ruling and i will not take... brand o'hara. —— brendan o'hara. speak _ mr speaker, i beg to move the snp motion has been tabled in my name and those on my right honourable friend's and those on my right honourable friends which calls for an immediate ceasefire in gaza from all combatants. i wish to put on record once again the unequivocal condemnation of the attack in october the 7th and repeat what our call for the immediate release of all hostages and to see those involved in those atrocities called to account for their actions. the war in gaza is one of the great defining moments of our time, yet until today this house has not been

do you think he will win any snp - from the snp in particular.ink he will win any snp votes i from the snp in particular. do you i think he will win any snp votes with that speech? it think he will win any snp votes with that speech?— that speech? it was interesting, because it _ that speech? it was interesting, because it was _ that speech? it was interesting, because it was a _ that speech? it was interesting, because it was a very _ that speech? it was interesting, because it was a very solid - because it was a very solid working—class speech. he is definitely pitching for the working class scottish vote which is what labour lost to the snp. they lost the middle class vote as well, as we said. i thought it was a very interesting emphasis on class politics. he talked several times about breaking the glass ceiling, a clever sound bite, iam about breaking the glass ceiling, a clever sound bite, i am a fan of tony blair which i won an apple politics to appeal to all classes. he thinks that message will go down well in scotland. and i have no reaso

and what does the snp do? i'm clear the snp do? . might more, right now. you might know more, jacob, snp to put a vote jacob, if the snp to put a vote forward of no confidence in the speaker of the house of commons, what happens then? can't what happens then? i can't remember happening remember this happening before i recall , um, when speaker michael recall, um, when speaker michael martin quit over his handling of the mp expenses scandal back in 2009, there was loose talk of an edm and that was enough to force him out . now that edm edm and that was enough to force him out. now that edm has already gone down from your colleague william wragg , now colleague william wragg, now he's chairman of the parliamentary of the public administration and constitutional affairs committee. put down committee. he's put down essentially, um , a petition for essentially, um, a petition for other mps to sign. it has no other mps to sign. it has no other force than that. but just the fact that an edm went down in speaker michael martin, 5 or 6 side

snp is seen to be three.s seen to be a major party with its dozens of mps, that's why he did it. mps, and that's why he did it. he was to be helpful to he was trying to be helpful to mps under pressure locally, and it wasn't really in his mind or his team's mind as a party political because that's how it appeared and what he's doing here. he's messing with the delicate balance in parliament of the rules are what they are. they be we saw of the rules are what they are. theyduring3e we saw of the rules are what they are. theyduring brexit. we saw of the rules are what they are. theyduring brexit. it we saw of the rules are what they are. theyduring brexit. it massively that during brexit. it massively queers the pitch. i think on future opposition day debates when if the rules don't apply now, will they apply? apply again in a future issue which may be awkward for the governing party, the tories, not just for labour and that's why he's really playing with fire, and he's doing so in an election year. he's doing

with the snp motion?re two problems it has. the first is, it does not condemn the hamas attack on the 7th of october. important to say, the snp has made clear it always condemns that, but the second thing, as you said, the snp motion talks about how it is important to end the collective punishment of the palestinian people. labour regards that as accusing israel of breaking international law. also problems for labour mps voting for the government amendment, because that talks about humanitarian pauses. it has to be much stronger than that. so where we are is, it looks like it is gearing up are is, it looks like it is gearing up for a very tense day at westminster, as there is a growing consensus on the diplomatic front that israel is going too far in its military operations. from across the political spectrum, from across the atlantic and from above the political fray, growing calls for an end to the violence. until now, the two main uk parties and the white house have been wary of challenging israel. but

. 50 amendments to this motion from the snp. , , ., , ., , snp.is likely to happen _ snp. so briefly, harry, what is likely to happen then - snp. so briefly, harry, what is likely to happen then in - snp. so briefly, harry, what is likely to happen then in the i snp. so briefly, harry, what is. likely to happen then in the next hour or so? and because this labour motion is going to be voted on, that avoids any potentialfor motion is going to be voted on, that avoids any potential for some sort of large—scale rebellion against sir keir starmer�*s position, doesn�*t it? exactly. keir starmer's position, doesn't it? exactl . ., , keir starmer's position, doesn't it? exactl. ., , ,, exactly. politically speaking keir starmer will _ exactly. politically speaking keir starmer will be _ exactly. politically speaking keir starmer will be relieved - exactly. politically speaking keir| starmer will be relieved because exactly. politically speaking keir. starmer will be relieved because he is unlikely to fail a large—scale rebellion because labour mps will h

and the snp do that. . and the snp wouldn't do that.at for that they weren't doing that for domestic political reasons, rather than what was in the interests of palestine. >> you're seeing lindsay hoyle in what will in 20 minutes or so. what will he be telling him? that we have confidence and that he confidence in him and that he has our full support , and we has our full support, and we recognise it was a difficult, uh, decision, difficult position given the need to hear all voices , the need to take into voices, the need to take into account mp safety and security. >> and i also want to listen to him what he has to say. him to hear what he has to say. >> there you're >> with respect there you're a smaller party in house of commons. parties , labour commons. the big parties, labour and the tories, they're fighting over this. do you think he over this. what do you think he needs to do , sir lindsay hoyle needs to do, sir lindsay hoyle needs to do, sir lindsay hoyle needs to do to restore the confidence of the house of commons in him. >>

of having snp mps at westminster.— snp mps at westminster.n flynn. thank you — snp mps at westminster. stephen flynn, thank you very _ snp mps at westminster. stephen flynn, thank you very much - snp mps at westminster. stephen flynn, thank you very much for- flynn, thank you very much for joining us. that debate is continuing in the house of commons just a few metres away from me. there will be a series of birds in a few hours' time and we will be bringing you those as they come. harry, thank you very much for now. let's return to the situation on the ground in gaza because the pressure continues to grow on gaza's remaining hospitals. the world health organization has released footage, from monday — of the evacuation of 32 critically ill patients from the nasser medical complex, in khan younis. it says, the hospital is barely able to function, with patients moved to a group of field hospitals in rafah — and to the nearby european gaza hospital. let's speak to a british orthopaedic surgeon who recently returned from working at that european g

the other thing is that the snp who obviously brought that the snp who obviously brought that originalhat they described as the collective punishment against the collective punishment against the palestinian people. the snp were calling for more time to be given to the debate so that they can actually have a vote on that original motion. now, the leader of the house of commons said that she is very sympathetic to the snp being given more time so i don't think we can rule out whether we will have time to go back in the house of commons and vote on that original snp motion. whether that happens is not clear. the snp are calling for it and the leader said she is sympathetic.— and the leader said she is s mathetic. ., , ., ~ , sympathetic. harry thank you very much and we _ sympathetic. harry thank you very much and we will _ sympathetic. harry thank you very much and we will of _ sympathetic. harry thank you very much and we will of course - sympathetic. harry thank you very much and we will of course be - much and we will of course be following this on bbc news, lewis vaughanjones is her

can i just to the turn, mr speaker, to the snp motion. can ijust to the snp motion if i may?fighting and suffering to stop, but it does not address, as currently drafted, although i did listen to the spokesperson for the snp, it does not address how the fighting will not restart. it calls for an end to the war but it does not lay out a path to a sustainable peace. it does not fully explain how a lasting ceasefire can be achieved and it makes no mention of a two state solution or palestinian statehood. it does not reference the icj ruling and the need for its full implementation. frankly, colleagues, the snp motion appears... if you wait one moment. it appears to be one—sided, for any ceasefire to work it must, by necessity, be observed by all sides are it is not a ceasefire! that is why we are clear. israel cannot be expected to cease fighting if hamas continues with violence, israelis have the right to the assurance that the horror of the 7th of october cannot happen again, i have no doubt that the snp agree with these sentiments because i heard that in the speech, he should

also angry the snp. also angry — the snp — here's their westminster leader, stephen flynn.exasperated. yesterday was supposed to be about the dire situation in palestine and due to the procedural decision, a politically motivated procedural decision made by the speaker of the house of commons following discussions he had with keir starmer, the snp proposal was not able to be voted upon. we have three days a year allocated to vote and the speaker took that opportunity away from us and did so following discussions with keir starmer and raises a huge number of questions and calls into question his impartiality as the chair that we all rely on on a daily basis. that was the snp — all rely on on a daily basis. that was the snp response. - for the conservatives — it's a chance to give labour a bit of a bashing. here's leader of the house, penny mordaunt. it fell to the government benches to defend _ it fell to the government benches to defend the rights of a minority party— defend the rights of a minority party in — defend the rights of a minority party in this house. if the hono

it is certainly what the snp are calling for, and we heard from stephen flynn, the snp's westminsteraying he would take some convincing to have confidence in its lindsay hoyle, and i think maybe that would be one thing that they are asking for is, to have that original —— original snp promotion, which called for an immediate ceasefire in gaza, and accused israel of collective punishment against the palestinian people, which amounts to a war crime, to have that original motion debated on again. we don't know whether that will happen, but that is certainly one option that the speaker could offer. find is certainly one option that the speaker could offer.— speaker could offer. and of course this is all somewhat _ speaker could offer. and of course | this is all somewhat overshadowed with what is a very serious issue. you might guess, completely, and in many ways, i was reporting from the central lobby in the house of commons yesterday, and this debate, sent into farce, as mps walked out, shouting at the speaker, and the debate about the house of commons procedure, ratherthan debate about

my regret it, i apologise to the snp. i never. _ regret it, i apologise to the snp.the snp. i never, ever want to go through a situation — never, ever want to go through a situation where i take up a phone to find a _ situation where i take up a phone to find a friend — situation where i take up a phone to find a friend on whatever side has been _ find a friend on whatever side has been murdered by a terrorist. threats— been murdered by a terrorist. threats to _ been murdered by a terrorist. threats to mps, especially since threats to mp5, especially since october the 7th, have weighed heavily on the speaker. that is the core of his defence of his extraordinary decision. last week dozens of pro—palestinian protesters turned up outside the home of conservative mp, tobias ellwood. thankfully the police were able to provide necessary barricade with their own vehicles, but ultimately it was deeply distressing to learn about that. but also for my village, they had never seen anything like this before. the they had never seen anything like this before-— this before. the pr

labour, the snp's but snp's and the government's.ble to say to voters, did vote for to their voters, i did vote for something that is going to secure meaningful lasting secure meaningful and lasting peace east, peace in the middle east, whether or not this would whether or not this vote would actually produce well , actually produce that, well, it's opposition day it's just an opposition day motion. doesn't have any motion. it doesn't have any binding but it is about binding effect, but it is about saying voters, i voted for saying to voters, i voted for a ceasefire of some sort. >> and is that andy? um, a performative of gesture to placate voters? we're seeing this becoming a huge issue, particularly in labour seats, with the high muslim population, for example, the student vote, the younger vote. is this a performative gesture to placate voters? i don't think it's cynical. >> i don't think it's just performative. you know, if they are going out and voting in what their constituents are interested about, you know, that's what should

uh, if the tories snp hadn't the tories and the snp hadn't stormed could had the tories and the snp hadn'te today. could had the tories and the snp hadn't stvote today. i could had the tories and the snp hadn't stvote today. i supposei had the tories and the snp hadn't stvote today. i suppose there had the tories and the snp hadn't stvote today. i suppose there isad a vote today. i suppose there is that, isn't there? look, 91% of you sir keir you think that sir keir starmer's weak leadership has been exposed by the gaza ceasefire. 9% of you say it hasn't. um, i've a tweet ceasefire. 9% of you say it hasn from n, i've a tweet ceasefire. 9% of you say it hasnfrom chrise a tweet ceasefire. 9% of you say it hasn from chris williamson, here from chris williamson, apparently. uh, williamson tweeted um , tweeted every labour mp um, contributing hashtag gaza contributing to the hashtag gaza ceasefire debate in the house of commons this afternoon is reinforcing , uh, why it's . reinforcing, uh, why it's. essentially hasn't happened. anyway, someone's moved that in my otoki. so thank very much my ot

. to see snp.e a decision on how going decision on how they're going to vote just vote for it. but as i've just said, think doesn't matter said, i think it doesn't matter because keir very clear the because keir was very clear the other to an end other day he wants to see an end to the fighting, as does, by the way, rishi rishi sunak. to the fighting, as does, by the wayyeah,i rishi sunak. to the fighting, as does, by the wayyeah,i risthere1ak. this >> yeah, but there was this permanent mike. permanent ceasefire, mike. there was broke it. and the was one hamas broke it. and the idea going to ask an idea you're going to ask an islamist terror group to put their down. their weapons down. >> their >> jordan, when in their manifesto, want manifesto, they want to annihilate never going to get a >> you were never going to get a ceasefire. you've got ceasefire. but but you've got you trust hamas in that. you seem to trust hamas in that. >> i don't think any i don't trust hamas, i don't trust >> i don't th

in any case, we move on because we've snp about. we've got the snp to talk about. ooh. push for another commons debate gaza following the debate on gaza following the chaotic vote on the conflict on wednesday, there uproar. how wednesday, there was uproar. how can there uproar can we forget there was uproar in commons speaker sir in the commons when speaker sir lindsay allowed mps to lindsay hoyle allowed mps to vote labour amendment to vote on a labour amendment to the motion . it the snp's ceasefire motion. it meant the snp motion was not voted on, prompting the party to say sir lindsay should quit as speaker but i'm sorry, this is just a massive waste of time. i'm going to come to you on this one, henry, okay? like anyone in gaza and israel is going to take the blindest bit of notice of not just what the conservatives or the tories or the labour party is saying, but what the snp say about this. we're getting a bit above ourselves here, aren't we? >> we are a little bit and we, um, i first of all get this out of the way. i think it was chaotic the other day. the debat

the snp has failed scottish workers on this.y do not have the desire to do they do not have the desire to do thejob. when you could have a national wealth fund to invest in scottish steel and sports. a british jobs bonus to create 50,000 newjobs in scotland's industrial heartlands. a publicly owned company, great british energy, based in scotland, investing in scotland's energy. removing our dependence, bills and cheaper scottish homes, that is the change we deliver for scotland. applause and finally, i would also say this. because if you do want that change for scotland, if you do want this to be more than words, if we are to show you that labour britain and what it can do for your community, then we do

opposition date and yet _ is called the snp opposition date and yet the snp have been left unable —ew. we were sent here by— unable to express our view. we were sent here by the people of scotland to express — sent here by the people of scotland to express their views, and we were denied _ to express their views, and we were denied from — to express their views, and we were denied from the ability to do so by keir starmer and denied from the ability to do so by keir starmerand an denied from the ability to do so by keir starmer and an tolerable pressure _ keir starmer and an tolerable pressure from the labour party up on the speaker— pressure from the labour party up on the speaker of the house of commons. he broke _ the speaker of the house of commons. he broke from precedent today. he was told _ he broke from precedent today. he was told quite clearly by the clocks of the _ was told quite clearly by the clocks of the house that this could happen yet he _ of the house that this could happen yet he pressed ahead, and the follow is that— yet he pressed ahead, and the follow is that e

to vote for an snp speaken going to vote for an snp speaker, no, the snp are going to vote for tory you're end up with him. you're going to end up with him. it's ridiculous. it's just ridiculous. >> irrelevant. >> irrelevant. >> a really unfair >> that's a really unfair reading >> that's a really unfair r> there are people there are people who voted yesterday who were complaining people who voted yesterday who were it, complaining people who voted yesterday who were it, who complaining people who voted yesterday who were it, who voted. complaining people who voted yesterday who were it, who voted. thisplaining people who voted yesterday who were it, who voted. this has1ing about it, who voted. this has been done before. opposition amendments to. amendments have been put to. it's not like it's never been done before. the chief commons clerk would disagree you. clerk would disagree with you. >> well, not infall

the number of mps climbing, the snp, he suspects by the weekend, the speaker will be gone.uch danger is the speaker in? �* . , gone. how much danger is the speaker in? �* ., , . ., gone. how much danger is the speaker in? �* ., , _, ., gone. how much danger is the speaker in? ., ~ ~, in? at last count we have 65 mps conservatives _ in? at last count we have 65 mps conservatives and _ in? at last count we have 65 mps conservatives and members - in? at last count we have 65 mps conservatives and members of. in? at last count we have 65 mpsl conservatives and members of the scottish national party you have backed this nonbinding, an early day motion, in parliament saying they have no confidence in him. but, he still has a reserve of goodwill towards him. there are no labour or liberal democrat mps who are questioning his position, lots of conservatives are saying that they still have confidence in him. at the moment, 65, it is a significant amount of people and of course, you have the fact that the third largest party in westminster, now, snp, saying they have no confidence in

like -- the snp mps then em tied commons? like -- the snp mps then emptied their — commons? then emptied their benches. _ commons? like -- the snp mps then emptied their benches. from - commons? like -- the snp mps then emptied their benches. from the - emptied their benches. from the opposite side, the conservatives said that they would have no part in proceedings. labor leader sir keir starmer did meet with the speaker before the vote happened. so did he pressure him to choose labour's text? it, pressure him to choose labour's text? ., text? i can categorically tell you that i did text? i can categorically tell you that l did not _ text? i can categorically tell you that i did not threaten _ text? i can categorically tell you that i did not threaten the - text? i can categorically tell you i that i did not threaten the speaker in any way whatsoever. i simply wanted to ensure that we had the broadest possible debate. the tragedy is that the snp want off the pitch because they wanted to divide the labour party and they couldn't add the government walked off the pace because

lindsay hoyle accepted that labour amendment for debate, infuriating the snp and several mps from thelindsay has said he regrets what happened and will hold meetings with all concerned parties. let�*s get our now see what happens just a few moments ago in the house of commons, we heard from penny mordaunt, the conservative who addressed this issue, and addressed what happened. she is the leader of the house. let�*s take a lesson. it fell to the government benches to defend the rights of a minority party in this house. if the honourable lady opposite cannot bring herself to reflect on the appalling consequences of her party�*s actions yesterday, if she cannot rise above the narrow and immediate needs of her weak and fickle leader... to fulfil her duties to this house, as it shadow leader, perhaps she might like to reflect on the damage her party has done it to the office of the speaker. i would done it to the office of the speaker. iwould never done it to the office of the speaker. i would never have done it to him what the labour party have done to him. so that was just in the last 15

, the snp, the us and many other countries.t of direction is going the same way. the general drift of direction is auoin the same wa. . , . going the same way. thanks very much for that. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. let's look at some other stories making news. the attorney general says the sentence given to the man who stabbed to death three people in nottingham was unduly lenient and is referring it to the court of appeal. valdo calocane was sentenced to an indefinite hospital order last month for killing students barnaby webber and grace 0'malley kumar, and school caretaker ian coates lastjune. birmingham city council has confirmed it will raise council tax by 21% over the next two years as part of £300m budget savings. street lights are to be dimmed, waste collections are to become fortnightly. the labour—run authority has been revealing details of cuts it must make after declaring itself effectively bankrupt last year. a huge meteor has been seen in the skies over lincolnshire and other parts of ea

thought that was the snp westminster leader. thought that was the snp westminster leader.ng saturday marks two years since russia's invasion of ukraine. since then more than 200,000 ukrainians have come to the uk. most expected to stay for a matter of months. a minority have returned to ukraine but as the war goes on, many say going back home is simply too dangerous. briony leyland caught up with one family who found refuge in the town of farnham in surrey. saturday morning has always been pancake time for anna and her daughter sofia. it is a fixed point where so much in their life has shifted. when putin's invasion began two years ago they fled their home together with anna's mother. they arrived in the peaceful stone grinding of farnham settling in with their host kate and reflecting on their host kate and reflecting on the danger that they had left behind. , ., ., behind. they were hiding in bathroom or in corridor— behind. they were hiding in bathroom or in corridor because _ behind. they were hiding in bathroom or in corridor because there _ behind. they were hiding i

prince william has called for _ for the snp motion.motion. prince william has called for an end _ for the snp motion. prince william has called for an end to _ for the snp motion. prince william has called for an end to the - has called for an end to the fighting as soon as possible, what impact will the statements he has made having westminster if any? i think certainly a lot of people are struck by the fact that the prince of wales has made a political, of sorts, statement, a geopolitical statement almost. although my sense is people on all sides of this debate westminster are taking it mostly as a humanitarian statement. he talks about the loss of civilian life on both sides. he calls per piece, he doesn't sorta get into the specifics as political parties sort of do about how that might be brought about and what a peaceful settlement might look like. but certainly the fact you have the house of commons debating this today and the fact that simultaneously the prince of wales has made a public statement on it i think shows that this i

government, labour, and snp government, labour, snp and the side and it's likely he the snp side andecause won't call the labour and he'll calcan government one because won't call the labour and he'll calcan sayvernment one because won't call the labour and he'll calcan say theiment one because won't call the labour and he'll calcan say the snp, one because won't call the labour and he'll calcan say the snp, one doesuse he can say the snp, one does what the labour does. what the labour one does. >> well, just explain to us. >> us. >> how does that work? then why does get to decide does the speaker get to decide which those he is the which of those he is the custodian of the commons and he decides motions called custodian of the commons and he deciwhat motions called custodian of the commons and he deciwhat aren't,tions called custodian of the commons and he deciwhat aren't, and, called custodian of the commons and he deciwhat aren't, and, well,alled and what aren't, and, well, we can't accused of being can't be accused of being prejudiced of he . prejudiced in favour of what he. >> n

if it's the conservative one, some labour mps could just vote for the main snp motion, the one party starmer called unbalanced. this would be damaging to his authority. earlier our chief political correspondent henry zeffman told me more about what we can expect today. you have three parties setting out in parliamentary language their positions on the conflict in israel and gaza. this has all been prompted by the scottish national party, as you say. they have tabled a motion calling for an immediate ceasefire. you have a labour amendment to that motion, which also for the first time since october the 7th, calls for an immediate ceasefire, but makes much more emphasis than the snp motion does on both sides of the conflict. they say you can't have a lasting ceasefire unless hamas lays down its weapons and they say israelis have a legitimate expectation that the horrors of october the 7th can't be repeated. so substantively they are calling for the israeli government to do a very similar thing to what the snp is calling on them to do, but they also are making more calls on hamas. and th

. majority snp. he's holed below the waterline. >> there you go, sheila, says michelle of the michelle at the start of the programme you was debating michelle at the start of the programior you was debating michelle at the start of the programior not| was debating michelle at the start of the programior not serving bating michelle at the start of the programior not serving mpsig whether or not serving mps should have their own show, she says say i for one, says can i just say i for one, think yes, they definitely should. watching them. think yes, they definitely shotsays, watching them. think yes, they definitely shotsays, uh, watching them. think yes, they definitely shotsays, uh, craigvatching them. think yes, they definitely shotsays, uh, craig says,ng them. think yes, they definitely shotsays, uh, craig says, i'm hem. she says, uh, craig says, i'm a law abiding working citizen. i personally not agree with the personally do not agree with the right to protest. protesting should at elections should

they snp's day was yesterday.own didn't get a vote on their own motion because of the way the speaker behaved quite clearly he gave in to pressure from the labour party, so he's proved himself to be weak, i think actually, but also partisan. and that's a very, very bad position for speaker to in. i'm for the speaker to be in. i'm actually remembering an occasion when um, asked him a question when, um, i asked him a question some back, i had a motion some time back, i had a motion down in my name, and david davies was a conservative mp and he like it. and he then he didn't like it. and he then relegated me to the end of the debate. although it was my motion and to i had complain to the john bercow, after, the speaker, john bercow, after, and apologised to me and john bercow apologised to me , he gave a prime minister's , he gave me a prime minister's question a debate. question and gave me a debate. but mean, so that's when but i mean, so that's when lindsay deputy, the deputy lindsay was deputy, the deputy at that

to the right of your screen snp — that seat? to the right of your screen snp mps _ that seat?ur screen snp mps are then - that seat? to the right of your - screen snp mps are then emptied their benches saying they are a debate was being usurped and on the opposite side conservatives who say they would have no part in proceedings. labour leader keir starmer met with the speaker before the vote happened, so did he pressure him in any way to get him to choose labour�*s text? i can to choose labour's text? i can categorically _ to choose labour's text? i can categorically tell _ to choose labour's text? i can categorically tell you - to choose labour's text? i can categorically tell you that - to choose labour's text? i can categorically tell you that i i to choose labour's text? i can| categorically tell you that i did not threaten the speaker in any way whatsoever. i simply urged him to ensure we had the broadest possible debate. the tragedy is the snp walked off the bench and the government walked off because they thought it was going to lose a vote. last night the speaker retu

we have a situation where the snp chose theissue have a situation where the snp chose the issue because something where they know they have a stronger position than say the labour party and they know it's a position that causes issues and division in the labour party and they will take the opportunity to highlight that. there is also the issue that the conservatives and snp have an interest in highlighting the divisions, so the party politics of it and how it plays out and trying to make life difficult on an issue that's been a real challenge for a number of labour mps, it was definitely of that.— number of labour mps, it was definitely of that. hannah, thank ou ve definitely of that. hannah, thank you very much. _ definitely of that. hannah, thank you very much, and _ definitely of that. hannah, thank you very much, and in _ definitely of that. hannah, thank you very much, and in the - definitely of that. hannah, thank you very much, and in the piece | definitely of that. hannah, thank - you very much, and in the piece from damien before we went to hand out we were hearing from sir kei

from the snp? dave only started doinu u- from the snp?ing up now because they havel from the snp? dave only started - doing up now because they have seen a lot of— doing up now because they have seen a lot of the _ doing up now because they have seen a lot of the minority vote is going to be lost in the next election. the second point i wanted to make, a couple _ second point i wanted to make, a couple of— second point i wanted to make, a couple of callers have said it will bold couple of callers have said it will hold on — couple of callers have said it will bold on and strengthen hamas, it won't, _ bold on and strengthen hamas, it won't, because the ceasefire is not for them, — won't, because the ceasefire is not forthem, it's won't, because the ceasefire is not for them, it's for the won't, because the ceasefire is not forthem, it's forthe innocent civilians — forthem, it's forthe innocent civilians that are dying. we are nearly— civilians that are dying. we are nearly at — civilians that are dying. we are nearly at the point of 30,000

my regret it, i apologise to the snp. i regret it, i apologise to the snp.ever, ever want to go through a situation where i take up a phone to find a friend on whatever side has been murdered by a terrorist. threats to mps, especially since october the 7th, have weighed heavily on the speaker. that is the core of his defence of his extraordinary decision. chanting last week dozens of pro—palestinian protesters turned up outside the home of conservative mp, tobias ellwood. thankfully the police were able to provide necessary barricade with their own vehicles, but ultimately it was deeply distressing to learn about that. but also for my village, they had never seen anything like this before. the prime minister is worried for what sir lindsay's decision says for our society. we should never let extremist intimidate us into changing the way in which parliament works. parliament is an important place to have these debates and just because some people might want to stifle that with intimidation or aggressive behaviour, we should not bend to that and change parliam

to an snp labour amendment.arian ceasefire to the break from convention sparked fury in the house, with commons leader claiming fury in the house, with commons lead> who would have thought that the government of the day didn't even the numbers on its own even have the numbers on its own side on a foreign policy proposition, there proposition, and that there decision from the decision to withdraw from the debate would effectively crater the plan that the speaker. had put together to make sure that all three propositions could be voted on in a jo

that is what the snp put forward last night. for storming out? i you blame them for storming out? i don't think the snp stormed out you blame them for storming out? i don't think the snp stormed out stop what happened last night went to the voting lobby to get ready to vote because they had had enough of the theatrics of the chamber if you like. but there was that misinformation at the start of it. i meant figuratively, because he was absolutely furious. i meant figuratively, because he was absolutely furious.— absolutely furious. i don't blame them for going _ absolutely furious. i don't blame them for going out _ absolutely furious. i don't blame them for going out to _ absolutely furious. i don't blame them for going out to the - absolutely furious. i don't blame them for going out to the lobby l them for going out to the lobby because they wanted to go and vote, to have their voices heard, represent their constituents, and i'm sure that this has been dominating conversations for months, they wanted to have represented their

the snp _ now need to look at what comes next. the snp was _ now need to look at what comes next.nment should stop selling arms to israel and uses voice and the united — to israel and uses voice and the united nations in order to call for an immediate cease—fire. that was a positive _ an immediate cease—fire. that was a positive and — an immediate cease—fire. that was a positive and proactive thing to do. i positive and proactive thing to do. i owe _ positive and proactive thing to do. i owe it _ positive and proactive thing to do. i owe it to— positive and proactive thing to do. i owe it to all the party leaders to have _ i owe it to all the party leaders to have discussions on all of that. but ultimately. — have discussions on all of that. but ultimately, westminster has decided that debate shouldn't happen. it's utterly— that debate shouldn't happen. it's utterly shameful. damiano, let's turn to —— damien, let's turn to him on the fovea. where do you think we are? we're in a situation here where you have basically that the man who instigated all of this, lee anderson, mp, when

because labour beat the snp in the politics on wednesday.litical game that they had been trying to play. so was it your sense that people are telling you to allow you to put together this jigsaw by saying, yeah, we brought one over on them. we managed to get lindsay on line. this is another thing that has been misunderstood about my reporting. because i obviously tweeted this after lindsay hoyle had made his decision and about 2—3pm on the wednesday afternoon, people assumed i had been given a briefing it was the labour party bragging, and off it went. you can't get into too much detail of when and where you spoke to people because then you could do jigsaw identification, but what i was saying is that this was reporting that took place over a 48—hour to 72—hour period. to you both, there is more treacherous waters for the speaker because if the snp want to meaningful vote this week on a gaza ceasefire — that takes me back as a journalist — that phrase is the burr coat era which got him into hot water which theresa may and apparently they are

can he survive the anger of the conservatives and the snp? good evening.been extraordinary scenes in parliament tonight. the day began with mps preparing to vote on calling a ceasefire in gaza. but instead of ending the day with a clear decision on what to say about the israel—gaza conflict, the house of commons descended into chaos as mps argued about arcane voting procedures and how a vote could be held. our deputy political editor vicki young has been following it all, and joins us now. yes, those events in the middle east really have led to some very emotional and fraud and often angry debates in the house of commons over that, particularly over the idea of when and if there should be an immediate ceasefire. today it was shaping up to be pretty tricky for labour leader sir keir starmer because it was the snp's day, they chose the topic and were going to force a vote on whether they should be an immediate ceasefire, which of course was going to expose divisions in the labour party. but none of it turned out as anyone expected. there was confusion, there

once hamas have been destroyed. >> so the snp, the snp's motion was broadly in alignment with the labourty's motion. but there were some details that were different and this would have put labour mps in a difficult position had they been asked vote on. asked to vote on. >> that's it. >> well that's it. >> well that's it. >> the speaker broke with >> so the speaker broke with convention forward the convention and put forward the labour motion instead of the snp one. yes. and people were very angry. if it had just been the snp one, what would have happened was they're saying ioo happened was they're saying 100 labour would have labour mps would have would have voted for it against, uh, the whips wishes . whips wishes. >> and of course, the upshot of thatis >> and of course, the upshot of that is because lindsay hoyle, the speaker, is of the labour party, it looks and smells a bit like collusion. >> what do you think? >> what do you think? >> a bit. yeah. i mean , >> just a bit. yeah. i mean, that's exactly what looks that's exactly what it looks like. exactly and don't know like. exactly a