Mail Weekly Column: 26 February 2024
As someone who observed with a grimace the shambles of Parliament trying to find a way through Brexit in 2017, with endless votes, huge amounts of anger (both confected and real) inside and outside of the House of Commons, I had thought that those terrible days were behind us.
But yet on Wednesday last week, in an Opposition Day Debate on the conflict between Israel and Hamas, the Commons descended into chaos. Endless shouting, cries of ‘point of order!’, a walkout by the SNP, and a near tearful statement from Mr Speaker followed. It was not our best moment.
All this happened over concerns that the Speaker had upended established procedure against advice in order to allow Labour to avoid an embarrassing row on an issue they are deeply divided over. SNP and Government MPs cried foul as the compromising of the Speaker is a serious issue, as was the consequence of the change, effectively denying smaller parties like the SNP a voice in such debates.
The row over this rumbles on, with over 70 MPs expressing no confidence in the Speaker as I write this. I will not dwell on the politics as plenty of column inches and TV minutes elsewhere have been expended on it. But I do want to talk about the wider issue.
The debate was about the awful conflict we’re witnessing between Israel and Hamas. There were three motions on the table and all called for a ceasefire in some way shape or form. It is absolutely fair to say that every MP from every party would like to see a ceasefire in Gaza. We want a ceasefire, but how is one possible when one of the sides is a proscribed terrorist organisation who won’t down weapons? So words and nuance matter.
If you listened to the debate itself, there was a huge amount of passion, concern and common ground. We are a kind and compassionate people. Of course the vast majority of us look at the actions of Hamas on 7 October utterly aghast. We are also hugely concerned at the humanitarian crisis that this conflict is exacerbating in Gaza, and hope for an end to it that enables a flow of aid and medical support, and the creation of a viable state whose very installation agitates against further conflict.
But in a world of social media hot takes, viral clips, and fake news, debates like this one aren’t actually used to share those ideas. Instead nuanced, qualified debate is reduced to shareable, weaponised clips. “Your MP voted against peace.” etc etc. The truth is far from that.
Politics has always been a rough and tumble affair and robust views and debate should be expected. But the cavalcade of online hate is now spilling into the real world, with terrible consequences. In the last decade, two MPs have been killed while performing constituency duties. Only a week ago, Tobias Ellwood faced a huge protest outside his home. Mike Freer had his constituency office burned down. At least one colleague and their family are effectively under police protection, and dozens of us have had graffiti daubed on our offices. Most if not all receive regular threats and harassment. Some of those are death threats - of which I have received more than a handful over the last four years.
This isn’t due to the specific motion on Wednesday, but a consequence of the coarsening of politics and debate, the inability of a few to look to nuance, and a preference for black and white, and right and wrong. And it is thanks to the media, and social media, chasing headlines and clickbait. We all have a part to play.
I raise this as a warning. Who in their right mind would want to enter the political fray these days? We face a choice of whether to drag ourselves out of the mire and do better as a society, or to swirl about the plughole a descend further to the sewer. I know which way I want us to go.
Changing this means effort on all our parts. Doing more reading. Engaging more. Not going for the quick hit on social media, and thinking beyond a headline. It’s not the easy path, but we would all be better off, more informed and less angry, for doing so.
