Filibustering tactics

Martin Redfern’s attempt to deflect from Labour’s shoddy filibustering tactics at Westminster ignores the facts (letters, February 29). The SNP MPs are not disengaging with Westminster and Stephen Flynn proposed a ceasefire in Gaza as a matter of principle, something Labour sadly lacks as a result of Sir Keir Starmer’s many U-turns.

After promising the SNP another debate on Gaza, Lindsay Hoyle went back on his word and we should remember that the Speaker’s “mistake” was after being warned by officials that he was breaking the normal rules. There was no precedent for turning the SNP’s Opposition Day into an additional Labour Opposition Day.

Hours away from the biggest rebellion of his leadership, Starmer decided to intervene personally and visited Hoyle to “urge” him to get Labour off the hook. If all shades of opinion were to be debated, why was the Lib Dem amendment not accepted?

Labour’s unprincipled opposition to the SNP motion seemed to be based on the use of the globally used phrase “Collective Punishment” to describe Israel’s actions – used in the ceasefire motion passed at the recent Scottish Labour Party conference. This puts an end to claims that Labour MPs from Scotland can influence Keir Starmer’s direction of travel.

The SNP motion also demanded the immediate release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas while the Labour amendment included, “statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people and not in the gift of any neighbour”. Something Labour in Scotland might reflect on.

Mary Thomas, Edinburgh

Where does that leave us? Who investigates the investigators? And who investigates them?