In a "Kinder, Gentler Politics" discussions of abuse are not allowed!

From Guido Fawkes:

Labour last night used a spurious three hour plus-long debate on procedure to block the scheduled debate on hard-left abuse of MPs. The Commons was supposed to spend the day discussing the abuse received by MPs during the election, instead Labour filibustered with a nonsense debate about how many debates they get to have until well into the night.

As Anna Soubry quite rightly said: "As a result of Labour’s filibusting tonight, this chamber will not debate the appalling abuse which many women candidates on this side of the House endured during the general election from the hard-left… There are many members on this side of the House that stood up for women on that side of the House when they were abused by their hard-left leadership."

Vicky Atkins criticised Labour for blocking the abuse debate “to talk about their diaries” instead, Andrea Leadsom blasted “Members on both sides of this House have been victims of vile abuse from anarchists and hard-left activists, but obviously Labour are not interested” and accused Jeremy Corbyn of having “prevented this debate“.
​

So bullying, intimidation and abuse by anarchists and the hard-left is acceptable in Britain today, is it? Corbyn bears responsibility for this: he is the party leader and he would have instructed his MPs to prevent the debate.

What an excellent Balanced Source what it doesnt mention is the attempt to limit Private Members Bills and opposition day debates

Here is the arch filibuster in chief

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/alan-taman/tories-filibuster-to-stall-labour's-nhs-bill

Tories filibuster to stall Labour's NHS Bill
Alan Taman 5 February 2015
Tory MPs demonstrated yesterday they would rather play games with parliamentary procedures than discuss how to fix the NHS. It's time for a radical commitment to a new Bill that will truly sort out the mess.

Jacob Rees-Mogg MP, one of those attempting to 'talk out' Efford's NHS Bill

In a towering example of how MPs can avoid discussing anything substantial and stop important changes becoming law, Tory MPs sitting on the House of Commons Committee for the Efford Bill (NHS (Amended Duties and Powers Bill)) showed their mastery of filibustering today – by spending over 2 hours debating whether future meetings should start at a later time.


Clive Efford’s Private Members’ Billto stop the worst changes to the NHS brought about by the Health and Social Care Act 2012 is Labour’s attempt to fix the damage already done to our health service. Yet it is being killed slowly at its committee stage by Tory MPs.

Conservative David Nuttall’s amendment to the Bill, proposing to shift the start time of future meetings from 9.30 am to 10 pm, set the stage for him to spend most of the hearing describing why this would be a good idea, including his view that it would allow MPs more time to get to the meetings during adverse weather. He was repeatedly supported in his procrastinations by Jacob Rees-Mogg (Conservative), who at one stage said that the later start would help ‘Westminster clerks’ brains’ to work better.

The only committee member present who voiced strong opposition to the filibustering was Phil Wilson (Labour), who on a point of order was able to state what most people would surely be thinking:

“… the NHS is the top concern of the public outside this House. This Bill received a second reading with 241 votes to 18. Won’t people struggle to understand why we’re not discussing the substance of the Bill rather than having to listen to Conservative members waffle inanely for nearly two and half hours?”

To which the Conservative Chairman of the Committee, Jim Hood, simply replied:“this was not a matter for the chair”.

If there were ever doubts that the current government has any intention of stopping or slowing down the continued privatisation and dismantling of the NHS, this latest act of parliamentary filibustering should dispel them.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/alan-taman/tories-filibuster-to-stall-labour's-nhs-bill

Instead of introducing a straw man to deflect attention, why don't you address the point?

Im sure the Government can rescedule the debate at its earliest convienience since it has so little on its agenda and theres nothing "straw" about Private Members Bills or Rees Moggs Filibuster, Zombie Parliment not withstanding