The Afghanistan debate showed that Boris Johnson’s flaws lead directly to tragedy | Zoe Williams

For Starmer, the point was what are the human consequences when power is held by someone so unfit?'

The initial shock of a packed House of Commons, recalled in recess for an emergency debate on Afghanistan, was how unfamiliar the packed green benches now look. Even before the pandemic, arguably since the prorogation of parliament, there's been a question mark over the point of it all; does a debate have to end in a vote, in order to have meaning? Is it otherwise just theatre, and if so, what democratic purpose does it serve?

The answer used to be very simple: it was to test and challenge the policy of the executive. It may have been ritualistic, but the ritual was dense with significance, indicating that no prime minister had the power simply to announce, every one must persuade.