
How the ‘jolly' Commons Speaker became one of Westminster's sharpest operators
Recent weeks have demonstrated why that is so important. First there were reports of an exchange with Rachel Reeves that saw the Chancellor weep on camera. Then there was the super injunction over the Afghan data leak. Harriet Harman, Sir Lindsay's old rival for the Speakership, suggested he had failed in his duties by not pressuring ministers to tell MPs. 'In the Speaker's chair, all eyes are upon you,' says one Labour veteran.
Having watched his two predecessors leave office in disgrace, Sir Lindsay is determined for the same thing not to happen to him. In the Reeves affair, he was trying to smooth things over after a previous altercation about protocol. In Harman's case, his office hit back firmly, pointing out that Sir Lindsay was bound by a super injunction. Publicly robust; privately conciliatory. It is that awareness of the unwritten rules of political discourse which explains Sir Lindsay's prominence in Parliament.
His Speakership is the culmination of a lifetime's work. Sir Lindsay was quite literally born into the Labour party. His father, Doug, spent 21 years as an MP; Lindsay's first Labour conference was as a baby in 1957. Growing up, he learnt the political craft from his father. While Hoyle Sr made his name in Westminster, his son cut his teeth in Labour's north-west machine. 'The by-ways of Lancashire,' said one ex-MP in 2019, 'are littered with the bodies of those who've underestimated Lindsay.' Seventeen years on, Chorley borough council refined Sir Lindsay's talents. In 1997, his dad retired, and Hoyle Jr, aged 39, entered the Commons.
The 2010 election, in which so many Labour hopes were dashed, proved to be Sir Lindsay's making. Encouraged by friends, he stood for the vacant Deputy Speakership and won. In the words of one colleague, 'The campaign for Speaker began that day.' For nine years, he served as the balm to John Bercow's poison, impressing MPs with his good humour and calm demeanour. The Speaker's decision to quit in September 2019 was a godsend for Sir Lindsay. For two decades, he had cultivated his colleagues; it was his friends, rather than the imminent Tory intake who would choose the new Speaker.
'It was decided by those leaving, rather than those joining,' reflects one former MP. Sir Lindsay was regarded as the runaway favourite and courted the electorate accordingly. To Tories, he sympathised about Bercow's politicking; for Labour it was a chance to have one of their own. Sir Lindsay ran as the candidate of experience, promising to protect MPs' security and restore Bercow's office to its former greatness.
During Covid, he won plaudits across the House for his determination to keep the Commons running. His penchant for Urgent Questions made him popular among backbenchers, much to ministers' irritation. 'He runs a permanent campaign,' says one frontbencher. 'We get his regular newsletter and see his stuff online.' Sir Lindsay has a veritable menagerie of pets named after various politicians. His cat, Attlee, boasts its own Instagram account and line of goods in the House of Commons gift shop. He has known tragedy in his family life, too: Sir Lindsay has spoken movingly about the death of his daughter Natalie, aged just 28, in 2017.
Sir Lindsay's worst moment as Speaker came in February 2024. As Labour tore itself apart on Gaza, Sir Lindsay was accused of favouritism by ignoring official advice. During an SNP motion calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, opponents charged that Sir Lindsay had bent parliamentary rules to let an alternative Labour amendment be debated instead. His response to the ensuing outrage showed his skills as a survivor. He apologised, quickly, on the floor of the Commons, offering to meet with parties 'to discuss the way forward'. That ability to admit mistakes and grasp 'the mood of the House' is partly why he has been able to survive the fractious era of post-Brexit politics.
'Lindsay likes to be liked,' says a friend. 'He understands people – how they work, what they think and where they want to be.' His attentiveness to MPs' needs has helped him win unlikely friends too. Within Reform there is praise for how the Speaker has welcomed their new MPs and given them suitable offices in Parliament. Nigel Farage has publicly declared his respect for Sir Lindsay. Where Bercow revelled in conflict, his successor largely eschews it. 'He's always down our end of the tea room,' remarks one Tory.
For such an astute operator, the Speaker does have a blind spot. His taste for the trappings of office has provoked much comment in the press. A string of foreign trips in business or first class ran up a sum of £275,000 in two years; Bercow took 10 years to rack up the same bill for 'non-regular' foreign travel. His accommodation is invariably high-end: the St Regis in Doha, the Westin Grand in the Cayman Islands, and the Ritz-Carlton in Los Angeles. One long-standing colleague suggests that Sir Lindsay's choices are indicative of an Old Labour mindset, namely that 'nothing's too good for the workers'.
There are gifts too, with Sir Lindsay keeping almost 300 presents since 2021 including dozens of bottles of alcohol, hampers, ties, cufflinks and chocolates. No rules have ever been broken, but there are echoes of the 'freebiegate' row that plagued this Government in its first months in office. Sir Lindsay's reputation as being 'pro-MP', means, in the words of one, 'none of us want to make much out of all that'.
The Speaker is unapologetic, insisting that he is merely maintaining the prestige of the office. Aides argue that his post confers an ambassadorial role, requiring him to build links between his office and its equivalents around the world. 'Other Speakers have their own aircraft and travel around the world all the time without criticism,' declared Sir Lindsay earlier this year. He sees himself as an unabashed champion of parliament.
Critics, though, question his mission of 'Speaker-led diplomacy'. They ask whether diplomacy ought not to remain the sole preserve of the elected government. A mis-sent email in January 2024 prompted a public row over whether Sir Lindsay had intended to fly the Palestinian flag from the grandly-named 'Speaker's Flagpoles'. Sir Lindsay denied this was ever his intention. Aiding the Speaker is an expanding team: the head count in the Speaker's office has doubled since he took over.
Yet despite his wobbles, Sir Lindsay seems near-certain to serve out the remainder of his Speakership in this parliament. Already there have been murmurings, sotto voce, about likely contenders. The diary columnists have started tipping Meg Hillier, the Treasury Select Committee chair. Nus Ghani, the current Deputy Speaker, is another seen as 'on manoeuvres'. At 68, Sir Lindsay is yet to name an exit date. But would-be pretenders for his chair could do worse than study his rise to the Speakership and make their plans accordingly. After all, that is what Sir Lindsay would do.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
6 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Elite police unit to monitor online critics of migrants
An elite team of police officers is to monitor social media for anti-migrant sentiment amid fears of summer riots. Detectives will be drawn from forces across the country to take part in a new investigations unit that will flag up early signs of potential civil unrest. The division, assembled by the Home Office, will aim to 'maximise social media intelligence' gathering after police forces were criticised over their response to last year's riots. It comes amid growing concern that Britain is facing another summer of disorder, as protests outside asylum hotels spread. On Saturday, crowds gathered in towns and cities including Norwich, Leeds and Bournemouth to demand action, with more protests planned for Sunday. Angela Rayner warned the Cabinet last week that the Government must act to address the 'the real concerns that people have' about immigration. But critics on Saturday night branded the social media plans 'disturbing' and raised concerns over whether they would lead to a restriction of free speech. Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said: 'Two-tier Keir can't police the streets, so he's trying to police opinions instead. They're setting up a central team to monitor what you post, what you share, what you think, because deep down they know the public don't buy what they're selling. 'Labour have stopped pretending to fix Britain and started trying to mute it. This is a Prime Minister who's happy to turn Britain into a surveillance state, but won't deport foreign criminals, won't patrol high streets, won't fund frontline policing. 'Labour are scared of the public, Labour don't trust the public, Labour don't even know the public.' Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, said: 'This is the beginning of the state controlling free speech. It is sinister, dangerous and must be fought. Reform UK will do just that.' In a further sign of dissent over the Government's approach to social media, campaigners claimed on Saturday that posts about anti-migrant protests in the past week had been censored because of new online safety laws.


The Guardian
29 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Beware the blizzard of lies: US advice on how to handle Farage's Trump tactics
Truth, the progressive California politician Hiram Johnson once said, is the first casualty of war. His oft-cited remark was supposedly made in 1918 in reference to the first world war, which had by then caused millions of human casualties. More than a century later, truth is again caught in the crossfire, this time as a casualty of 21st-century culture wars. If Donald Trump is the high priest of disinformation, then Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform, is showing signs of being a willing disciple, if his behaviour in the UK this week is anything to go by. Farage has proposed sending prisoners abroad – including to El Salvador, where the Trump administration has sent hundreds of deportees and suggested sending US citizens. He also suggested an extensive police recruitment drive and prison-building programme all while cutting health and education spending. The parroting of Trump's policies by a UK populist has not gone unnoticed in the US. And for those who have studied the president's modus operandi, there is one particular tactic the British public should be braced for: the blizzard of lies and false statements that frequently overwhelms his opponents. The Trump experience, they say, contains sobering lessons for Farage's critics. US pro-democracy campaigners says Trump has become even harder to factcheck since his first term, thanks to a combination of factors including looser social media content moderation and a reluctance among some media owners to stand up to his intimidation. The Washington Post, which tracked more than 30,000 lies or misleading statements from Trump during his presidency, lost subscribers and public trust after its billionaire owner, Jeff Bezos, reportedly vetoed an editorial endorsing the Democratic nominee Kamala Harris for president. 'It's become more difficult because there's less commitment from those who are in the best position to do the factchecking,' said Omar Noureldin, a senior vice-president for Common Cause, a non-partisan group. 'Seeking the truth here comes with costs and risks.' Complicating matters is the loss of trust in institutions, with many consumers relying on social media platforms for news. 'Even the best factchecking can be unpersuasive, because we're not just facing an information crisis here, but also a trust crisis in the American information ecosystem,' Noureldin said. Media watchers say the political environment has become so deeply polarised that factchecking can even have the counter-productive effect of further entrenching misplaced beliefs. 'From a lot of research, we're reaching the conclusion that factchecking hasn't been as effective as one would want,' said Julie Millican, the vice-president of Media Matters for America, a media watchdog. 'One reason is that information and disinformation spreads faster than you can check it. It takes a lot longer to factcheck something than it does for it go viral. 'But the other thing is factchecking can backfire. People so distrust institutions that factchecking can validate the misinformation in their minds and make them more inclined to believe the lie they believed in the first place.' A 2022 report from Protect Democracy suggests this is the result of a deliberate strategy of authoritarian regimes. 'Disinformation is spread through coordinated networks, channels and ecosystems, including politically aligned or state-owned media,' the report said. 'The goal is not always to sell a lie, but instead to undermine the notion that anything in particular is true.' Further complicating the problem in the US has been Trump's appointment of allies to key government agencies that have traditionally served as sources of accurate and reliable data for factcheckers. A case in point is Robert F Kennedy Jr, who has engaged in anti-vaccine theories. As Trump's pick for health and human services secretary, he is in charge of the country's vast health bureaucracy. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion 'Factchecking wasn't working very well in the first place, but now you can't even get access to the facts that you need be able to factcheck as well as you used to,' said Millican. The outlook seems bleak, but campaigners say that does not make the problems insurmountable. One answer is to invest in independent, non-partisan research. A prime purpose would be to increase media literacy among young people, who primarily get news from platforms such as TikTok which can be subject to disinformation tools such as AI-manipulated videos. The aim is to teach consumers how to spot doctored footage. 'Media literacy is extremely important and something that should be invested in and taught at a young age,' said Millican. Another solution is the development of 'pre-buttal' strategies to inoculate the public against disinformation, in effect getting the truth out first. Media Matters for America and Common Cause used this approach during last year's presidential election, partly by producing videos designed to counter anticipated false narratives surrounding voting procedures in certain areas. Also important, said Shalini Agarwal, special counsel at Protect Democracy, is calling out the demonisation of vulnerable groups, such as immigrants, as soon as it happens. A crucial role is played by media, even as Trump intensifies his assault on journalists as 'fake news' and tries to exclude certain established outlets from press briefings. 'It's really important when there are opportunities for one-on-one briefings and there are multiple reporters,' Agarwal said. 'Part of it is a sense of collective action. Often, whoever is speaking at the podium won't give a straightforward answer or gives a false answer and then tries to move on – it's incumbent when that happens for other reporters to jump in and say: 'Wait. What about what the other reporter asked?'' Millican has two pieces of advice for Britain and other European countries hoping to arm themselves against any coming authoritarian onslaught: fortify the media and preserve legislation designed to combat disinformation and illegal content online – represented by the online safety act in Britain and the digital safety act in the EU. 'The first thing that's going to happen in these authoritarian takeovers is they're going to try to silence and take over the media and information landscape,' she said. 'Any efforts to rein in hate speech or misinformation on platforms will be seen as tantamount to suppression of conservative thought or free speech. 'I can't stress enough trying to buffer the pollution of your information ecosystem as much as possible. One of the first things that they're going to do is just take down any barriers they can.'


Sky News
31 minutes ago
- Sky News
Eighty years on from Labour's landslide, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza brings Clement Attlee's failure on Israel and Palestine to mind
Here's one for the aficionados: 26 July 2025 marks the 80th anniversary of Labour's landslide victory in the 1945 general election. Trade unionists and Labour MPs are celebrating, claiming the nation still owes a debt of gratitude for the historic achievements of Clement Attlee's government. Yet today, as the world watches the humanitarian crisis in Gaza with horror, it's worth recalling that one of Attlee's biggest failures was his Israel - Palestine policy. (Oh, and while Attlee's health minister Aneurin Bevan boasted he "stuffed their mouths with gold" to overcome doctors' opposition to the NHS, today doctors are on strike over pay again.) The 1945 election took place on 5 July, the same date Sir Keir Starmer entered 10 Downing Street last year. But with British armed forces still serving overseas in 1945, it took until 26 July to declare the result. 9:30 Labour won 393 seats in 1945, compared with 411 last year. But while Sir Keir's Labour only won 34% of the votes, Mr Attlee won nearly 50%. But then, there was no insurgent Reform UK back then. Celebrating the 80th anniversary, Joanne Thomas, who became general secretary of the shopworkers' union Usdaw in April this year, said the Attlee government left a lasting legacy. "Usdaw's predecessor unions were proud to play a role in the 1945 election victory and to see 18 of our members elected," she said. "Not least a hero of our union 'Red Ellen', a fiery trade union organiser who led the Jarrow hunger march and went on to serve as education minister." Wilkinson was indeed red. Attlee biographer Trevor Burridge wrote: "Ellen Wilkinson was made minister of education despite the fact that she had actively campaigned against his leadership." She was MP for Jarrow, not a million miles from the current education secretary and Starmer super-loyalist Bridget Phillipson's Houghton and Sunderland South constituency. But not even her best friends would call her red! Ellen Wilkinson was also the only woman in Attlee's 1945 cabinet. Last year, Sir Keir made history by appointing 11 women to his cabinet. Labour MP Marie Tidball, elected last year, joined the tributes to Attlee. "He transformed Britain for working people and this legacy laid the foundations for Britain today - our NHS, welfare state and homes for heroes. "Those public services meant I could grow up to fulfil my potential. Labour legend." But if Attlee's NHS, welfare state and nationalisation are viewed as successes by Labour trade unionists and MPs, his government's policy on Palestine is widely agreed to have been a failure. In his acclaimed biography of Attlee's foreign secretary, "Ernest Bevin: Labour's Churchill", former Blairite cabinet minister Andrew Adonis wrote: "Why did Bevin get Israel/Palestine so wrong?" Adonis says Bevin's policy on Palestine "led to the precise opposite of its declared intention of stability and the peaceful co-existence of the Jewish and Palestinian communities within one state at peace with its neighbours". He concluded: "Instead, Bevin's legacy was a Jewish state of Israel, much larger than even most of its advocates previously favoured, in periodic war and perpetual tension with both its Palestinians and its Arab neighbours." Where did Bevin go wrong? Adonis wrote: "In the first place, because, during the three key years 1945-48, he did not agree that his central policy objective was 'good relations with the United States'." As Sir Keir Starmer prepares to meet Donald Trump in Scotland, 80 years after the historic Attlee victory, that's clearly not a mistake the current Labour PM has made in his relations with the US president. " I like your prime minister," the president said as he arrived in Scotland, "he's slightly more liberal than I am, but I like him". So, 80 years on from Attlee, lessons have been learned. So far, so good, that is.