JACOB Rees-Mogg, the Leader of the House of Commons, has accused Labour of opposing the physical return of MPs to Westminster in a bid to "stymie" the UK Government.
Ahead of a meeting with Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker, senior politicians from opposition parties and representatives of the unions, Mr Rees-Mogg claimed Parliament was not able to do its job properly under the current hybrid arrangements.
Labour, SNP and Liberal Democrat sources have told The Herald that their MPs will not return to Westminster in any numbers until it is safe to do so.
They fear returning to the Commons en masse would put staff, MPs and their constituents at risk of spreading coronavirus as politicians went back and forth to London.
One Labour MP said it was a “nonsense” for the Government to try to end virtual contributions, noting how the Speaker had stipulated no more than 50 MPs in the chamber at any one time because of the need to maintain social distancing.
“If we had to vote observing social distancing, the queues would run from the lobbies, through Westminster Hall, to the street,” said one backbencher.
A Tory MP complained about the lack of normal participation of MPs, which was affecting scrutiny of Government and suggested that virtual contributions could continue but in a new phased return to normality.
Opposition leaders took part in a conference call last night on the issue and moves are afoot through the “usual channels” ie the party whips to try to maintain virtual contributions. Matters are likely to come to ahead in the 24 hours as Parliament rises for the Whitsun recess tomorrow evening.
The Government has made clear it does not want to see the hybrid arrangements - allowing MPs to participate remotely - extended beyond the recess, which ends on June 2.
That would mean MPs would have to attend in person to take part in proceedings at Westminster.
Speaking on his ConservativeHome podcast, Mr Rees-Mogg said: "What has been done is remarkable but it simply isn't a proper Parliament doing its job."
The Somerset MP said the hybrid provisions, which have included MPs contributing over video-link from their homes and taking part in remote voting, limited the amount of scrutiny of legislation.
He added: "Frankly, the Opposition like having a hybrid Parliament because what is the Opposition there to do? It's there to stop the Government getting things done. And it was willing to sacrifice a degree of scrutiny to stymie the Government's programme."
He said it would be "unreasonable" for pupils to start returning to schools in England - which could happen from June 1 in a phased manner - while MPs stayed away from Parliament.
Mr Rees-Mogg dismissed reports that the Tories were keen for a physical Parliament to return in order to bolster Boris Johnson when he takes on Sir Keir Starmer, following difficult sessions of Prime Minister's Questions against the new Labour leader.
It was a "completely trivial" point and claimed that Sir Keir's "Perry Mason approach to parliamentary scrutiny" did not work.
"It may convince a jury in a TV series but it didn't convince the British public," he said.
This afternoon, Mr Rees-Mogg is due to take part in a meeting of the House of Commons Commission chaired by the speaker.
Prospect, the union which represents staff in the Houses of Parliament, said a risk assessment had not been carried out for the return of all MPs and warned that Commons votes could take an hour to resolve because of social distancing rules limiting the numbers allowed in the lobbies.
Garry Graham, the union’s Deputy General Secretary, said: "Staff have made Herculean efforts to enable Parliament to work remotely, keeping MPs and staff safe and ensuring our democracy is unimpaired.
"It beggars belief that the Government would throw all of this away by forcing hundreds of MPs and staff to return to Westminster, putting them at risk and causing vast delays that will hamstring Parliament's ability to function effectively."
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