Like I said, I dont know why. Perhaps he saw in his previous life that private member bills/legislation carried a higher degree of loopholes.
Look, I am not defending him, just echoing what was said when the hoo hah about the up skirt objection was explained.
I think like a lot of difficult discussions, there is a tendency for people to want to tribally fall into a position. As I say, he has a valid point about bills being rushed through where there may be serious flaws and also about the right fit backbench MOs to debate fully bills brought before parliament. It's a point of principle and one that essentially serves to protect parliament. I very much doubt he is against the principles of the bill. It is such an obtuse and stubborn position to take on issues like these though - especially given that he doesn't universally apply it.
Calls after the upskirting objection, that he was a pervert, were baseless and actually did nothing to further the conversation or prevent it in future, probably even damaged it.