A new style of Speaker?
I've just interviewed the new Speaker about how he will seek to win the confidence of both the public whose anger he has acknowledged and his own colleagues in the Tory party, many of whom are horrified by his election.
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
Speaking in the palatial splendour of Speaker's House, John Bercow told me that he will not - in future - claim an MP's second home allowance. He defends his own past expense claims insisting that he paid back money voluntarily to cover the tax he had saved after "flipping" his home designation.
The new Speaker told me that he favours greater transparency over MPs' expenses when I asked him whether he would reverse the decision to black out much of the information about who claimed what.
Mr Bercow insists that more Tories backed him in a secret ballot than the three or four prepared to say so publicly. He suggests that most in his own party were used to someone of a different generation holding the position and insists that he can win their backing with the way he handles his new responsibilities
As for the day-to-day business of running the Commons, the new Speaker says that he wants to see "brisker business" with shorter questions and answers, and a "more considered" approach. Asked if he was prepared to discipline the prime minister and the leader of the opposition to achieve this, he answered simply "yes".
For the new Speaker to do a round of TV interviews is itself an innovation. Beyond this, though, I was struck by the fact that a man who's spent 10 years plotting to get this job was very cautious - one might almost say conservative - about the changes he promised.
His style will become apparent this afternoon but it will be intriguing to see when - or if - he unveils the changes which justify his billing as the reform candidate.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~08~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Did you ask if he would make the Prime Minister answer any questions in PMQ? That would be the biggest change he could bring in
Complain about this comment
A clear indication that the labour party are going to lose the
next election and have no hope in hell on winning and wanted somebody
that would upset the next governement. Rather than the cosey way
Mr Martin has dealt with Mr Blair and Brown etc.
What is good for the goose is not going to be good for the gander etc.
More sinisism from nulabour
Complain about this comment
Oh who cares indeed?
Judging from what I hear and read the public couldn't care a damn about this Speaker elect.
What most want is a general election and a clean slate and if that flushes the Speaker elect down the drain he can pay for his own plumber instead of billing us as in the past.
Complain about this comment
Business as usual then! The bankers can still pay themselves millions in bonus payments and another speaker is elected to the old boys club to carry on this great 18th C act, so much for a modern government...
Complain about this comment
On the question of expenses, only full disclosure will satisfy the public. If MPs knew their constituents would be combing their claims with a fine-tooth comb you can bet they'd keep the list clean. Personally I don't have an issue with reasonable claims for maintaining london flats or for that matter employing your spouse as PA - most family businesses do the same. So let the new speaker concentrate on the real fiddles like tax avoidance and 'researchers' enjoying holidays at the taxpayer's expense, not about bath plugs and dodgy videos.
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick
This vote was interesting in the way it reflected MPs views.He is considered a reform candidate because he has paid money back but whilst typing this a radio advert has come on about "benefit cheats", as far as I can tell such an option is not offered to them... Indeed the tone sounds rather threatening to me.
So even a so-called reform cndidate has one rule for the political elite and one for others.
Not a good start.
Complain about this comment
So we now have a speaker who is supposedly going to sort out sleaze, yet has just confessed to immorally , if not illegally , purloining public funds, returning the falsely claimed money is supposed to make his attempted pocketing of taxpayers' money permissable. He should in fact also be under investigation by the due process of law for fraud. Hopefully his constituents will deselect him before the next election. In spite of all the adverse publicity , the Westminster snouts are intent on continuing to steal at will from the public purse, ably abbetted by the current government. None of their proclamations of " mistakes and oversights " are acceptable, they are thieves and should be treated as such; removal from and debarrment from public office for all those guilty of " mistakes and oversights " should be automatic, and enforceable in law.
Complain about this comment
THANK GOODNESS! IT'S BACK TO BUSINESS AS USUAL .....
Bercow as Speaker - and nine million quid for the new RBS boss. Ho hum... back to business as usual.
With any luck the peasants will have forgotten the expenses business by the time we have to have an election.
Isn't life grand?
Complain about this comment
"Speaking in the palatial splendour of Speaker's House, John Bercow told me that he will not - in future - claim an MP's second home allowance."
That's awfully big of him to make such a sacrifice and leave himself stranded in this terrible but free hostel for the homeless. A plague on all their grace and favour houses.
Complain about this comment
"Speaking in the palatial splendour of Speaker's House, John Bercow told me that he will not - in future - claim an MP's second home allowance". Deftly put, Nick.
He can also announce that, since his seat will - by tradition - be uncontested, he needs zero communications budget too...
Complain about this comment
Too fond of his own voice
Time will tell and I will go along with the view that a
leopard never changes its spots.
Browns comments yesterday had me reaching for the sick bowl
Why do we have to put up with this charade
Complain about this comment
We can but hope that Bercow confounds his critics now he has won the high office of Speaker. Getting Brown to answer a straight question would be a good start.
However, it is all a sideshow - what we really, really want is a General Election now!
Complain about this comment
I guess what would be interesting for you to explain, Nick, is what practical powers the Speaker has for reform. Apart from controlling the business in the house, as it happens, how does he go about making changes, either to expenses, or the make up of committees, or the way in which the house does work?
Complain about this comment
Getting rid of the stupid wig and breeches would be a start. Plus all the other fancy dress nonsense and procedural gobbledegook that makes parliament look like something out of a Gilbert & Sullivan production.
Complain about this comment
"he won't be claiming a second home allowance"
Will that be because he gets a home in or next to the Palace of Westminster which goes with the job? Kind of a flat over the shop, so to speak?
Can that also be because his salary and pension takes a mega leap?
Is somebody taking us for idiots yet again?
I think we should make a rumpus and get a speaker in from the PUBLIC. Er, not a political manoeuvre.
Complain about this comment
It's a shame Glenda Jackson didn't stand.....she would have been more like Betty Boothroyd perhaps and has already had some practice in the hot-seat when she played Elizabeth I.......perhaps next time...Or maybe Supernanny; a firm hand is needed to keep those naughty kids in order....
Complain about this comment
#10. At 12:51pm on 23 Jun 2009, Woundedpride wrote:
"He can also announce that, since his seat will - by tradition - be uncontested, he needs zero communications budget too..."
Wrong, he still has a constituency to serve and even though the convention between the three main parties is not to contest the Speakers seat at a general election there is nothing to stop anyone else from doing so.
Complain about this comment
Politics is a tough game.
Rubbish.
The speaker has a difficult job.
Rubbish.
Brown Labour is a load of .....
RUBBISH!
If the gelatinous globs of gluttonous goo got off their Ministerial Farces and spent a day in industry, or in a classroom, or in an A&E; they would soon find out what it's like to do a real days work, for real days pay.
Being an MP is an easy ride.
Excellent pay, outstanding benefits, gold plated pension,
superb holidays and don't forget expenses and second homes.
If being an MP is such a chore, then why does it become the family business?
Maybe the resident labour flower pot men can answer that one.
Why should decent, hard working people put up with MPs that have only ever been MPs?
Honourable Members who have not done a stroke of real work in their lives, who have no life experience, who have not experienced the lifestyle of their electorate.
Let's not forget MPs from the rancid ranks of the Unions.
I have known my fair share of union reps and one thing is for sure, there isn't a trough big enough for them to sate their greed.
Some of them are so addicted to the orgy of gluttony, they spew up, just so they can stuff themselves with more (broken toilet seats galore).
Come on Britain, wakey wakey.
Politics isn't everyone's cup of tea, but at least take a look at the human flotsam and jetsam that now rule our country.
Surely we can do better than this.
Surely.
Complain about this comment
#11. At 12:52pm on 23 Jun 2009, GrumpyBob wrote:
"Why do we have to put up with this charade"
We, or more to the point you, don't have to, there is nothing to stop you standing for parliament, putting your case to your chosen hustings and then if elected putting your case to your fellow MPs.
Complain about this comment
Listening now to Brown's interview on "World at One". What a load of tosh he speaks. All this "root and branch reform" by those who up until now fought tooth and nail to prevent it - is just rubbish.
NOTHING is required of ANY MPs currently sitting in Parliament except their immediate resignations and a General Election as soon as possible.
These clowns are still trying to carry on as if anyone could ever trust them again. Don't they realise yet that they're all going to be booted out as soon as we can vote. Unbelievable!
Complain about this comment
Sooner or later there will be a General Election and I sincerely hope that the English public will consign most of these MP's to political history.
That might seem a bit of a brutal judgement but it isn't really, just politics in a democracy.
We are very, very lucky to live in a relatively benign democratic environment here in England.
I am still stunned by the picture of young Neda Soltan dying on the front cover of todays Times.
Sometimes, a sense of perspective is necessary and our political (and economic) troubles are not really so bad.
Complain about this comment
So there we have it!
A speaker elected by the opposing party and ostracised by his own.
A speaker caught with his snout in the public purse.
Gordon Brown again uttering a few words with a total lack of integrity.
Transparency! I don't think so!
Complain about this comment
#12. At 12:55pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
"However, it is all a sideshow - what we really, really want is a General Election now!"
I bet they do, the euro-sceptics that is, last chance saloon and all that - these people, who keep calling politicians names and calling for an immediate election, are no more interested in sorting out MPs expenses than 'Richard'-Turpin was interested in giving up highway-robbery, their real interests are a few hundred miles away to the north-east...
Complain about this comment
Boilerplated wrote:
"Why do we have to put up with this charade"
We, or more to the point you, don't have to, there is nothing to stop you standing for parliament, putting your case to your chosen hustings and then if elected putting your case to your fellow MPs.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Well put. It will be interesting to see how many of the posters outraged by the current state of affairs will get off their backsides and stand in the next election or actively campaign for someone who does.
I suspect that they will decide that it is much easier to snipe from the sidelines.
Complain about this comment
#19 Boilerplated
Quite right. I could, but Martin Bell did and won, but what changes did he make ? None, he failed to overcome the party system and wasted his efforts in my view.
I will stick with the blogs and voting UKIP (since I did a Bercow after 35 years of voting conservative)
Time will still tell !
Complain about this comment
may be electing a non member of parliment to the duties of speaker would open it up to better choice of person as we have seen from recent problems within the house over various revelations can any mp be neutral enough to do the job openly and fairly ?.
sadly i dont think they can personaly.
Complain about this comment
It was interesting watching the live broadcast last night as the result was announced. The opposition benches sat arms crossed, stony faced. Brown talking about "an agreement that crosses the house" was so dishonest it almost made the tories gag. Has he ever been straight about anything in his entire life?
Complain about this comment
#23. At 1:28pm on 23 Jun 2009, Boilerplated wrote:
#12. At 12:55pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
"However, it is all a sideshow - what we really, really want is a General Election now!"
I bet they do, the euro-sceptics that is, last chance saloon and all that - these people, who keep calling politicians names and calling for an immediate election, are no more interested in sorting out MPs expenses than 'Richard'-Turpin was interested in giving up highway-robbery, their real interests are a few hundred miles away to the north-east...
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ho Hum! We need a speedy General Election for the following reasons:
1. The present Government has wrecked the public finances and is borrowing unsustainably large amounts of money. Servicing the debt interest from this scorched earth policy, will cost more than the entire education budget the way things are going. Is that a useful form of "public investment"? We need a General Election so we can get a new Government with the mandate to sort out the public finances - Brown has kicked the issue into the long grass, because he cannot politically do anything about tax and spend before the next election - so we need the election now!
2. This Parliament has been disgraced by the abuse of ACA and Parliamentary Expenses by MPs (of all parties). There needs to be an election so the voters can pass judgement on their own MPs. Until the Commons is cleansed by an election, it is completely lacks any moral authority (as does the Government).
Have I answered your comments?
Complain about this comment
PERFECT CHOICE by Liebour MPs - TOTALLY encapsulates what they are - corrupt, snouts in trough, look after ourselves, then Liebour, then overseas, then maybe those who they were meant to govern. Berk and Liebour deserve each other. ANOTHER nail in the coffin of what was once called Democracy. As for so called Political Editors asking any tough?????? questions - forget it.
Complain about this comment
The usual Brown twaddle "greatest reforms ever" "More widespread than ever" "best things since sliced bread, no better even than sliced bread!"
"taller, higher, wider, deeper, louder than any reforms ever" "only me, only I can do this".
Blah blah blithering blustering Brown.
The most obnoxious thing about it is that MPs KNEW what sort of system they were setting up and I doubt for a second that they would be looking to change it without the Telegraph's stories. For Brown to be looking for some sort of moral high ground for cleaning up the cess pit that he presided over is absurd
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick,
If this election of Bercow is in the interest of the people's parliament then I am Donald Trump.
Ann Widdecombe was by far and away the choice of the public according to what I've read in various sources. But of course, in this game of pulling one over your opponents Labour wanted to pull one over the other side and here we are.....the best candidate didn't win on the day. How fitting that this would be at the behest of a ruling party totally out of touch with the mood of the public?
And oooooh...."Speaking in the palatial splendour of Speaker's House, John Bercow told me that he will not - in future - claim an MP's second home allowance."
How mighty nice of him, gee I am touched that a man who'll earn £145k a year is not claiming for a second home.
Complain about this comment
#14 Speaker Martin got rid of the wig when he was elected and we know how that ended.
Can't see the wig returning, though it might actually be a good thing to bring back to give a visible signal of the authority of the speakers chair. Re-imposition of the impartiality, probity and honourable traditions of the house (okay laugh now)associated with the role could be what is required.
Perhaps Nick could also ask to interview Bercows wife as he seems to have moderated all his own views to better coincide with hers, perhaps whatever she thinks should happen is more relevant than what Speaker Bendy currently thinks.
Complain about this comment
#24 I have tried twice and beat the Monster Party. But only ever had a just to do it at a token jesture. Delivered about 200 leaflets, which were denise on detail (did not want a sound-byte effort) but detail that people could think about and engage with. Got around 50 votes.
it was only a council ward election. Apparently some of the other delivered around 15,000 leaflets with there little armies of helpers
Complain about this comment
19. At 1:16pm on 23 Jun 2009, Boilerplated wrote:
#11. At 12:52pm on 23 Jun 2009, GrumpyBob wrote:
"Why do we have to put up with this charade"
We, or more to the point you, don't have to, there is nothing to stop you standing for parliament, putting your case to your chosen hustings and then if elected putting your case to your fellow MPs.
================================
Putting aside the cost of a deposit & mounting a campaign you forget that due to our fantastice party poltical closed shop that if you are an independant no-one will listen to anything you have to say because your'e not a member of the club.
seriously, when was the last time you heard an independant speak in a debate?
You could try to enlist yourself as a fifth column in one of the 3 parties, but if you got as far as parliament you'd find yourself either a slave to the whips or out in the cold or even expelled from the party.
The present system is designed to keep those outside of the mainstream (defined by them) outside.
I think the political games they played over the speaker elections is once again proof that party politics has little to do with the national interest.
They didn't vote for the person they thought would do the best job, they voted for the one they thought would most annoy the opposition.
Complain about this comment
#29 as well as an election to clear out parliament, these is also the issue of political editors and reporters at the BBC and actually how they perform there roles and the use of tax payers monies.
Complain about this comment
4. At 12:13pm on 23 Jun 2009, mvan99 wrote:
Business as usual then! The bankers can still pay themselves millions in bonus payments and another speaker is elected to the old boys club to carry on this great 18th C act, so much for a modern government...
Can I suggest a maximum wage?
Complain about this comment
The new speaker really only needs to remember one thing.
That is that parliament and its members have just about lost all credibility with the UK public and, more specifically with the UK electorate.
That is an enormous crisis and one that will have consequences and sequels for many years to come upon many aspects of UK government, politics and democracy.
It is not a 'photo-opportunity', quick 'bit of spin', type of problem and some serious soul-searching is going to have to happen before MPs win back the public trust.
At worst, it could ensure that future elections become meaningless as more and more people ask themselves, "why bother?" or conclude that, "None of these doughnuts are worth going out to the Voting Station and writing down a 'x' for!"
So, dear Mr Speaker, how will parliament continue if say the next general election has only a 10 or 15 percent turn-out? Just keep the heads down and pretend nothing has happened, perhaps? (After all, the MPs, even if voted in by one hundredth of one per cent of the electorate will still get their pay and expenses, won't they?
Complain about this comment
35. At 2:28pm on 23 Jun 2009, IR35_SURVIVOR wrote:
#29 as well as an election to clear out parliament, these is also the issue of political editors and reporters at the BBC and actually how they perform there roles and the use of tax payers monies.
=========================
cool, you just come up with a definition of 'bias' 'impartiality' and 'neutrality' that everyone can agree on & isn't based on relative individual perspectives, and we can get started.
Complain about this comment
#31. At 2:08pm on 23 Jun 2009, kingrgs78 wrote:
"Ann Widdecombe was by far and away the choice of the public according to what I've read in various sources. But of course, in this game of pulling one over your opponents..//.."
Err, I think the real reason Miss Widdecombe didn't win might have been the fact that she had already made it known that she was leaving Parliament within the next 10 months (though she had made 'noises' about staying on but had not said she would, if I recall correctly), could it be that MPs were looking for a long term Speaker, knowing that reform of parliament, form, function and costs is not going to be a 'quick-fix'?...
Complain about this comment
#32. At 2:16pm on 23 Jun 2009, Whistling_Neil wrote:
"[in reply to #14] Speaker Martin got rid of the wig when he was elected...//..."
Incorrect, Betty Boothroyd refused to use the wig when she because Speaker, Martin followed her example on her succession.
Complain about this comment
Will the new speaker hold the government to it's own standards?
Gordon Brown promised parliament that announcements would be made to the house, not to the media. Despite this promise, only this morning, Brown made yet another announcement to the "Today" program (probably because of the generally sycophantic attitude of their presenters towards the Labour party). Will Bercow hold Brown to account?
Additionally, why does the BBC conspire with the Labour party to evade Brown's promises? The BBC could have turned the microphone off as soon as Brown started making policy announcements. Why didn't they? Possibly because the BBC has abandoned even the pretence of political neutrality in favour of broadcasting Labour propaganda.
Complain about this comment
28. At 1:48pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
"Ho Hum! We need a speedy General Election for the following reasons:"
The reasons don't matter. You're not going to get one! It's just not the way it works.
And even if a billion people demanded and election on every blog in the country - it still wouldn't cause one to happen.
You equally won't get a proper say in who ends up as prime minister - that will be determined by the people who get voted in as MPs, even if only one person has turned out to vote in a constituency.
Our parliamentary 'system' is only democratic to some degree and then only if lots of people believe in the system, trust the politicians and bother to vote.
It was never designed to - because the need was never perceived that it might have to - work with high levels of voter apathy, low voting turn outs and high levels of dis-satisfaction amongst the electorate with the honour and integrity of politicians.
Complain about this comment
41:
I imagine the thought of having a captive TV audience in front of him was too big an opportunity to miss out on. The new Speaker should give him a rap on the knuckles for retreating into the bad old habit of making policy announcements away from Parliament.
Complain about this comment
We are now stuck with a government bereft of ideas vision and credibility and a speaker so tainted by the expenses saga himself he is unlikely to be pushing too hard for too much reform.
We are at an impasse where the deselection of all MP's tainted by the expenses scandal has become an impossibility because of the numbers involved and the dire effect it would have on all parties.
The selection of Bercow will give them all a breather in which to try to appease the voters before the next election. Perhaps this is necessary so parliament can at least get on with other crucial matters that continue unabated.
The world didn't stop and they have taken their eye off the ball on many of the issues that are building up around us.
The electorate will always have the final say.
Complain about this comment
#38
#41
and maybe this is where we need to start the PM+cabinat are not allowed by law to use the BBC interviews to announce policy it has to be before the house first, then there is time to prepare the proper questions.
But the system has to change as its broken, the question is to recognise its broken first and why the start to define what is required to fix it.
and that would be more than what could be put on this blog
Complain about this comment
GoBro was up to his old tricks on Wato. He has apparently always been in favour of an Open Public Inquiry and still thinks that it is only the Tories that will have to cut public expenditure.
If he is reading this I will speak very slowly so he can understand:
Whoever is in Government after the next election will have to slash public expenditure because they will have to pay back government debt incurred by GoBro and Aldar. Those of us who actually pay tax have reached the maximum that we will pay, any further increase will reduce the tax received by government.
On his suggestion that he might go back to teaching God help the students. You can tell GoBro but not a lot.
Complain about this comment
41. At 2:50pm on 23 Jun 2009, Cynosarges wrote:
Will the new speaker hold the government to it's own standards?
Gordon Brown promised parliament that announcements would be made to the house, not to the media. Despite this promise, only this morning, Brown made yet another announcement to the "Today" program (probably because of the generally sycophantic attitude of their presenters towards the Labour party). Will Bercow hold Brown to account?
Additionally, why does the BBC conspire with the Labour party to evade Brown's promises? The BBC could have turned the microphone off as soon as Brown started making policy announcements. Why didn't they? Possibly because the BBC has abandoned even the pretence of political neutrality in favour of broadcasting Labour propaganda.
=============
if Brown wants to publically break promises he's made to the house by announcing policies on national TV why should the BBC conspire to retrieve the situation for him by halting the broadcast?
now that would be bias.
Complain about this comment
#42. At 2:53pm on 23 Jun 2009, Sutara wrote:
28. At 1:48pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
"Ho Hum! We need a speedy General Election for the following reasons:"
The reasons don't matter. You're not going to get one! It's just not the way it works.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know you are correct in the basics, but there is the whiff of insurrection in the air. You only have to read the blogs across the spectrum to see there is a huge, pent up demand for an early General Election. The longer Brown delays on this, the worse it will be for Labour when that election is eventually called.
As I pointed out in my earlier post, there are serious issues to be resolved which have been kicked into the long grass after any election - we cannot afford to wait until next Spring to start sorting out the black hole in our public finances, so something is going to have to give!
Take to the streets and demand an election - it is the only way!
Complain about this comment
There is no " new style speaker " just the same old drivel and balderdash to which we've grown accustomed from politicians and political pundits.
I am ashamed of the House of Commons , I am ashamed of the House of Lords.
I would lie to think that some of the " Honourable " members have the wit and wisdom to be ashamed of themselves but it would seem unlikely.
Complain about this comment
You'd be better off entitling this article - a new style of politics - rather than speaker.
The truth is that in just the space of four years while newlabour has grimly clung onto power, mangled the economy and blamed everyone else in the process the great British public has managed to:
Chuck newlabour out of control of the Scottish Parliament.
Chuck newlabour out of control of Edinburgh council
Chuck newlabour out of control of all the county councils in the whole of England.
Chuck newlabour out of the London mayorality
Get rid of the worst speaker on record who was newlabour too.
Give newlabour only 5% countrywide support in the European elections.
All this, yet still the BBC manage to go on believing that somehow the great Gordon Brown can pull the big one off..
His ministers are booed on Question Time yet they still put themselves up for the job of speaker.
Gordon Brown is booed by ninety year old veterans at Dunkerque yet still he bleats on about not walking away.
If ever there was a man and a party that had gone well past their sell by dates it is this bunch of utterly shameless losers and their shambles of a party.
Call an election.
Complain about this comment
21. At 1:27pm on 23 Jun 2009, JohnConstable wrote:
Sooner or later there will be a General Election and I sincerely hope that the English public will consign most of these MP's to political history.
Indeed there will, and indeed they shall. The problem is, what dross, with even less experience and who is to say any more integrity will be there to replace them? What, precisely would a 'general election now' do to solve the problem? Same old electoral system, higher salaries, same old trough, just a different set of second-rate snouts. Or perhaps third-rate snouts.
And, to whoever it was that suggested that I stand for parliament. It's a great idea but it won't work. I'm a bit too old for the X-Factor circus that will be the next general election, I wouldn't get through it without taking a swing at a reporter, and anyway I probably couldn't do a better job than the incumbent Geraldine Smith.
I wouldn't mind getting my hands on all that loot though...I'll think about it.
Complain about this comment
#48. At 3:22pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
"Take to the streets and demand an election - it is the only way!"
Indeed, it is probably the only way to get the reading of the riot act, or is this 'demand for an election' going to be nothing more than a damp squib...
Complain about this comment
"[Brown} told Radio 4's World at One it was the biggest ever reform of Parliament."
Clearly and obviously it is no such thing. He's attempting to reform the expenses system, that's all.
Brown just loves projecting the delusional image he has of himself as some sort of towering political giant bestride the world of tiny people who depend so much on him.
He's clearly bonkers. Blair KNEW when he was lying, Brown has convinced himself he is telling the truth. Even more so, he's convonced himself that the mere fact that he is saying something makes it true. If Blair said he could fly, he'd know he was lying, some people might think they can fly and say so but Brown believes that if he says he can fly, this will mean that he can.
Complain about this comment
goldCaesar @ 34
You are right to be concerned as to how effective can an independent MP be, even assuming that they can be elected.
I believe that Sir Paul Judge has tried to address this issue via his creation named 'The Jury Team', which provides a overarching support network for independents who wish to challenge the existing 'big three' political cartel.
It would be worth looking into this and I commend Sir Paul Judge for this very timely initiative, which is sorely needed to improve our English democracy.
Complain about this comment
52. At 3:43pm on 23 Jun 2009, Boilerplated wrote:
#48. At 3:22pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
"Take to the streets and demand an election - it is the only way!"
Indeed, it is probably the only way to get the reading of the riot act, or is this 'demand for an election' going to be nothing more than a damp squib...
=======
of course it would mean that we'd all have to stop blogging for a bit ....
Complain about this comment
A new style of Speaker? Personally I doubt it, but we must I suppose, give him the benefit of the doubt.
If he means business, he will act quickly and:
1) Reprimand Government ministers (including the PM) when they make announcements through the media rather than to the House,
2) Let it be known that future publication of MPs' expenses will be based on the "Daily Telegraph" template rather than last Thursday's farcical publication by the House Commons, and
3) Set in motion the means to enable the House to pass a resolution requiring the election of select committees by secret ballot thus emasculating the Whips and beginning the process of restoring power to the Legislature.
Actions speak louder than words especially from a Speaker who sees "nothing wrong" with manipulation by an MP of his/her second-home designation - a loophole only available to our legislators - to avoid paying Capital Gains Tax. In any event, why does a Member representing Buckingham need a second home?
But we should give him a chance - at least until the elction which cannot come soon enough.
Complain about this comment
The first rule of the new Speaker then:
"Thou shalt not make new policy statements outside the confines of The Houses of Parliament".
Complain about this comment
Nick -- when you speak with the "Speaker" next why not ask him to do what the greater public wants -- dissolve parliament & CALL AN ELECTION before Brown does any more damage
Complain about this comment
51. At 3:42pm on 23 Jun 2009, Its_an_Outrage wrote:
# 51. At 3:42pm on 23 Jun 2009, Its_an_Outrage wrote:
21. At 1:27pm on 23 Jun 2009, JohnConstable wrote:
Sooner or later there will be a General Election and I sincerely hope that the English public will consign most of these MP's to political history.
Indeed there will, and indeed they shall. The problem is, what dross, with even less experience and who is to say any more integrity will be there to replace them? What, precisely would a 'general election now' do to solve the problem? Same old electoral system, higher salaries, same old trough, just a different set of second-rate snouts. Or perhaps third-rate snouts.
_______________________________________________________________________
I have tried to explain this ad nauseum - the present Government has lost all its political and moral authority and is like a rabbit stuck in the headlights. We need a new Government with a fresh mandate to do necessary things like addressing the chronic state of the nation's public finances before we go bust, instead of after we go bust. That means an early General Election - geddit???
Complain about this comment
anyone who thinks that the BBC is biased towards Labour, clearly has never seen an episode of Newsnight, or the Daily Politics, or listened to the Today programme, or PM, to name but a few.
We have reached a sorry state of affairs in this country, where it seems that the majority have already decided that Bercow's speakership is going to be a disaster. This cynicism shows that people's ability to even contemplate someone with the desire to change parliament could be genuine, makes it even more important that the new Speaker is the 'clean break candidate' he described himself as. People should give him a chance, before he is consigned to the dusty pages of history.
Complain about this comment
This new speaker sounds like a drone. Let him have the job... clearly it is just a typical British cushty number, something for his family to be proud of and for the rest of us to say "Whatever!"
Complain about this comment
"a man who's spent 10 years plotting to get this job."
Why?
He may nor may not be a good man, he may or may not has hidden agenda.
Who does he really serve? Does he spend 10 years plotting because he really, full hearted want to serve the UK public and only the UK public?
I am keeping my doubts and my fingers crossed.
On transparency. The new speaker must make transparent lobbying by lobbists, UK and foreign, finnancial, commercial, personal, military and political.
Complain about this comment
Another day, another quiver of the needle of Gordo's moral compass.
This time it is telling us it cannot (!) be right that MPs decide their own expenses or allowances or even the rules that govern them.
But Great Oracle surely an implicit assumption that MPs as a whole are untrustworthy is a fatal contradiction at the very heart of our whole conception of democratic government.
Any fool can see that surely, never mind a Great Oracle.
Question
When, in the whole period of its alleged existence, has Gordon Brown's moral compass ever been seen to have clearly pointed him to a sound judgement call on any issue of any description? Enlighten me please someone, the Oracle is driving me crazy.
Complain about this comment
I'm all for Parliament being "cleaned up" and "reformed", but to me there remains a large element of smokescreen to the entire exercise.
In the run - up to the Euro Election there was much talk (usually from UKIP) about just how little of our legislation is now home - grown, with figures in the order of 75% being quoted as being the amount of work that is actually doing no more than enacting EU Directives into UK Law. I have no recollection of anyone challenging that figure, so I assume that it was not far out.
Not small matters such as the "West Lothian Question" remain unaddressed, and I have no lively hope of that changing. Now I firmly believe that while the number of MPs may have been correct in previous times, faster personal travel, coupled with faster communications, results in the number of 646 (or thereabouts) being just far too many bottoms on seats in the Palace of Westminster. Add to the mix things like the existence of National Parliaments or Assemblies in Scotland and Wales, leaving the basic constitution of Parliament (in the physical meaning of the word) unchanged is indefensible. We certainly do not need that number of people to rubber stamp EU Commission directives, even if they have been gold - plated during their translation into English, as has been frequently observed.
I suppose it's too much to hope that there will be a *proper* review of Parliament that not only makes it transparently honest, procedurally correct but structurally correct for the role it actually has?
Even less likely is its insistence on our behalf that *it* is the correct legislative assembly for the UK, not Brussels.
If Capt. Mainwaring were about I think he could only say "Stupid Boy" to that idea.
If only...
Complain about this comment
I think, perhaps, this Parliament now has the Speaker it deserves. One of his first statements was to the effect that the majority of MP's were honest, and there for the benefit of the people. This is patently untrue, would he not have been better advised to announce the publication of a list of the MP's who had NOT taken advantage of the expenses fiddle, as it surely was, so that those not on the list, including himself, could be disposed of at the General Election, whenever that will be. If we are honest with ourselves, isnt it just possible that this sad collection of MP's in fact reflect the society we live in and the depths to which we all have sunk. Very rarely a day goes by without a shocking story of man's inhumanity to man [or children], and each time we think it can't get worse...but it does. It is not only Parliament that has experienced the debasement of authoritarian figures, look at the Police for example......... In any event this joke of a Parliament together with its poser of a Speaker will eventually pass into memory. Roll on.
Complain about this comment
So we now hear today from John Bercow that he will not be taking any money in cash Allowances for a Second Home. Wow!,what News for I should think not given the FACT that he now has a Grace and Favour Home that goe's along with the Job of Speaker, so who doe's HE think he's kidding - the Tax-Payer?, or is this one of HIS ideas to tinker around with falling over himself to Fix a broken down Parliamentary System.
Anymore ideas like this and we will ALL fall about laughing, that is of course if the current corruption at Westminster was not as it is Serious.
Complain about this comment
#59
"I have tried to explain this ad nauseum - the present Government has lost all its political and moral authority and is like a rabbit stuck in the headlights. We need a new Government with a fresh mandate to do necessary things like addressing the chronic state of the nation's public finances before we go bust, instead of after we go bust. That means an early General Election - geddit???"
That may or may not be so, but under our (unwritten) constitution it is in the gift of the PM to decide when the election is going to be - remember that if you rock the boat to much on this the next time that your 'government of choice' is in power I'm sure that you would not wish to have the same accusation made against it and thus forced out without the required vote of confidence being moved and won by the opposition, would you - Geddit???
Complain about this comment
#7 kaybraes
"Hopefully his constituents will deselect him before the next election"
Indeed they should, but sadly his former party will likely "follow convention" and not oppose him as neither will the unLib unDems. If a "clean up politics" independent is going to get anywhere, this should be the best seat to try. Esther Rantzen for Buckingham, perhaps?
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
59. At 4:16pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
I have tried to explain this ad nauseum - the present Government has lost all its political and moral authority and is like a rabbit stuck in the headlights. We need a new Government with a fresh mandate to do necessary things like addressing the chronic state of the nation's public finances before we go bust, instead of after we go bust. That means an early General Election - geddit???
Nope, sorry, I still don't quite geddit. We don't need another second-rate government, whichever side of the House they sit. Also, I'm afraid that this incessant shouting for an early general election is about as useful as a football chant. It's not going to happen. Let me explain. The decision can only be made by the government (or perhaps, admittedly, the Army), and as it's not in their interest to call an election at the monment, they are probably not going to.
Complain about this comment
64. "Not small matters such as the "West Lothian Question" remain unaddressed, and I have no lively hope of that changing."
Rather off-topic but have always wondered, does the west lothian question also apply to London MPs as London also enjoys devolution along with Wales N.I. and Scotland?
Complain about this comment
Boilerplated #17: Wrong yourself, actually. His need for communication with his constituents about the sterling work he is doing as their advocate on HoC Select Committees, on the floor of the House, on overseas missions and in debate will be significantly reduced now that he cannot participate in that way. Surgeries will stay, of course, and the letters to Ministers, but those won't figure in his communications cost claims.
Of course, he may need some money to circulate one of the usual self-aggrandizing news-sheets prepared by our MPs that help to replenish our recycling bins, featuring valuable pictures of photo opportunities at the local swinmming baths...
As for the likelihood of no contest for his seat, whatever happens at that point he will need to register election expenses, not HoC communications costs, to support his reelection. Of course, there is every opportunity that some disaffected renegade Tory will oppose him.
Complain about this comment
re:39 Boilerplated
The fact that Anne Widdecombe would only have been speaker for a year or so was surely positive - she could have facilitated the necessary radical reforms without having to worry about the old guard and her her political "career". She would have done the job for all the right reasons and not been sidetracked by all the wrong ones.
Look at the reaction of the public to last night's vote.
Now think about how different the reaction would have been if Ms. Widdecombe had been chosen.
I rest my case m'lud.
Complain about this comment
#60 I have first hand experience of the BBC. As said before had them in a pincer movement with a friend that showed beyond any doubt that they are bais and filter the news agenda to a particular view QED
Complain about this comment
It has been proposed today that those MPs who knowingly fiddle their expenses (fraud) stand a chance (some hope) of being sentenced to 12 months imprisonment. Now if Joe Bloggs did the same in the course of his employment and found himself at the local Crown Court he could probably pick up far more than 12 months and he is unlikely to be in a position of such trust as that of an MP. Why are MPs treating themselves so differently? Are they so outside the law. A good number of MPs are lawyers and it seems their fingerpints are all over this proposed legislation.
Its just the same old faces - same old rhetoric. Nothing is going to change, even with a new Speaker. Once the summer recess is over, Parliament will settle back into its old ways - knowing full well that there will be no further disclosures from the Telegraph.
The only way we are going to see a real change of mood in the country towards Parliament is for there to be a General Election - and it cannot come a minute too soon.
Complain about this comment
#72. At 6:08pm on 23 Jun 2009, expatinnetherlands wrote:
"Look at the reaction of the public to last night's vote.
Now think about how different the reaction would have been if Ms. Widdecombe had been chosen."
You mean, rather than all but the 'nose out of joint Tories' applauding Mr Bercow on his election there would have been all the Tories clapping whilst everyone else sat on their hands...
Just face the facts, even many Tories weren't voting for Widdecombe, look at the voting figures, if they had been Widdecombe would have replaced Sir George Young in the final ballot.
Complain about this comment
In theory, Bercow could do 2 things which are guaranteed to gain him the respect of the entire electorate:
1) Expenses; ask Brown why he needs to setup endless committees and quangos to police their expenses and to work out what those expenses should be, when instead they can simply say "we'll live under the same laws as the rest of the country does; we'll just do what HMRC allows other people to do."
2) Force Brown to answer questions at PMQs; if Brown refuses to do so then he needs to get Brown physically ejected from the House.
Both of these things are things which the speaker should be doing as a matter of course; it's his job. If he does so then he'll gain huge respect in the electorate. If he fails to do so then he'll be seen as no better than Martin.
Remember that by classing something like furnishing a second home as an expense (not taxable) rather than a perk (taxable), MPs have committed blatent/basic tax fraud; the fact that their own "rules" themselves broke the law in this respect does not mean that they should be allowed to get away with it.
MPs; play by the same basic tax laws as you force everyone else to live under; stop this insane "rule-committee" mentality and simply abide by the law. Contrary to what the BBC tries to spin on your behalf, there are people other than MPs who have more than one office, and those people are not allowed to invent their own rules to avoid tax on perks. You want to know why people are angry with you? It's simply because you don't play by the same rules that you force onto the electorate, what you do is illegal, immoral, and just plain unfair.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
MP's have not taken on board there pay and expenses they are trying to take us for as much as they can and
The bankers are just taking us as mugs Shareholders who gave their assent to the package proposed for Mr Hester included UK Financial Investments, the arm of the Treasury, which manages taxpayers' 70% stake in Royal Bank. some civil servant who wants to be on the gravy train
The targets are a joke Mr Hester will not have any trouble in hitting such low targets
In respect of the 6.4m long-term part, half is payable if the share price were to hit 375p (compared with 37.5p this morning)then that would be a target that would be worth paying him for that but to take the share price from 37.5p to 70p they are having a laugh they must think we are idiots
Fill your pockets at the tax payers expense they don't mind They will just pick up the bill over the next 50 years
His pay should of not been more than 250,000.00 per year
Complain about this comment
a new style of speaker ? ... maybe, but a very old style of Tory Party. Political picture of the week has to be Cameron desperately, pleadingly trying to get his own MPs to have the good grace to clap the new speaker as he was dragged to the chair, without much success.... so, as usual, Tories dont like the will of the majority expressed through a secret ballot... unless it corresponds with their own views ... and this is the party that will, barring some astonishing fluke, form our government for the next few decades .... Oh Dear !
Complain about this comment
Could someone please explain why we need a general election and soon?
What would really radically change?
We would still have far too many MPs and Lords.
Their expense system would only be slightly modified.
They'd still be in their palatial Palaces of Westminster which must cost us an absolute fortune.
Their 'grace and favour' accommodation would continue (look at the Speaker).
We'd still have contituencies where people would vote for a donkey as long as it belonged to their political party. A decent Independent wouldn't stand a chance.
This is probably, for many years, the only chance the electorate has to force this archaic parliamentary system to downsize and modernise.
Complain about this comment
Some weeks ago I wrote a comment on another Blog Article in which I explained that I would not stand as a canadidate for MP to the UK Parliament as I really couldn't stand the thought of having to shower every hour to clean off having spent time amongst the corruption, venality and shere hypocrisy of the Palace of Westminster (this was pre-MPs' expenses scandal).
Not to put it too mildly, Mr John Bercow, newly elected Speaker was exactly the sort of greasy individual I had in mind.
For this flipper of 2 mortgages to have been elected Speaker by this 650 gross dullards is the final piece of the evidence to reveal Parliament is utterly unrepresentative of the Citizens of the UK.
A plague, a plague of everything rotten on both Chambers! And soon! The sooner the better!
Complain about this comment
Personally I would have prefered to see Ann Widecombe as Speaker. After all she has announced that she is standing down at the next election so there is no worry about if she would make a good speaker and reform the House of Commons or not.
Saying that....after the next election it is unlikely that many of the current MPs will be taking up their positions on the benches for the next session.
Is it me or.....does it just seem that Parliament has 'lost the plot'
Complain about this comment
Sorry but this blog, like so many others, is just becoming a 'rantathon'...
Complain about this comment
I had not really heard of John Bercow until the speaker contest but I saw him being interviewed on TV tonight.
I don't know what it is about him and his mannerisms but it is easy to see why people may not like him. I don't know why ! He just seems to ooze insincerity and I wouldn't trust him at all. Unfair comments I know as I've never met him or know much about him, but to me that is how he comes across.
Complain about this comment
Can we have a reality check here Nick? Let me see. Bercow's journey was from Tory to Tory to Tory. How is this such an extraordinary journey when Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown went from being radical socialists (Marxist in Darling's case or perhaps he preferred being known as the more distinct Trot.) who didn't think radical socialism was nearly radical enough, to cheer leaders for unfettered free market capitalism. Now that's what I call a political journey.. Bercow was wrongly swayed by Powell and by Thatcher's excesses and suckered into Brown's big tent. But it's all relative. Not an edifying political journey perhaps but at least one within the bounds of reason unlike the journey of both Brown and Darling. Which is precisely why we are in the mess we are in today, being stewarded by pilots with no core of being and absolutely no instinct for capitalism and its often wayward ways. When Mr Brown does arrive in the world of academe no doubt he will start lecturing everyone with the benefit of a 2020 rearview mirror. The historian's conceit.
Complain about this comment
#83 Boilerplated wrote:
Sorry but this blog, like so many others, is just becoming a 'rantathon'...
---------------------
Does this mean you will never post on here again?
(Please, please, please...)
Complain about this comment
New laws target rule-breaking MPs
This is just fluff. As we know all-to-well most of the claims made by MPs were inside of the cosy set of rules that they created for themselves. The few that fall outside of the rules are open to fraud investigation.
Typical nu-lab when in a fix legislate and hope it is mistaken for real action
Complain about this comment
No change there then Nick
As your colleague Waugh at the standard points out
Why hasn't Bercow called upon Brown for announcing the MP code of conduct on the World at One when Harriet was to make the announcement to the house later the same day
If Bercow still allows the planted questions for policy announcements too then surely we just have Martin jnr?
Would that be sufficient to tip the public opinion?
Complain about this comment
#83 Boilerplated wrote:
Sorry but this blog, like so many others, is just becoming a 'rantathon'...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Boilerplated has posted 12 times on this one blog, yet do not see the irony in complaining about this blog turning into a "rantathon"!, I see a new job as an MP opening up for Boilerplated!.
Complain about this comment
Boilerplated and #83.
People complaining! A 'rantathon'!
Why would that be?
1) Failure to keep promise for a Referendum on the EU Constitution.
2) Failure to keep promise for a Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
3) Failure for 1 of 650 MPs and Cabinet Ministers to resign at once from post due to Expenses scandal.
4) Failure to keep promise of more 'open', 'transparent' Government by deliberate Censorship of published Official MPs' Expenses Claim returns.
5) Failure to acknowledge wrongdoing and arrest, charge and prosecution of MPs for knowingly submitting Expense claims ranging from 'compost bag' to 'duck house' to 'filial MP assistant living 200 miles from Parliament' to 'continuing claim on 2 paid up mortgages' and so on.
6) Failure to accept Parliament needs root and branch Reform as indicated by election of 2 x 'residence flipper' John Bercow as Speaker.
7) Failure by Messrs Brown, Cameron, Clegg et al to set an example - - all 3 had 'inadvertent' expense claims that were unworthy of people in such high office.
8) Failure to complete Reform the House of Lords
9) Failure to recognise or do anything about the 'Democratic defecit' in UK/England Politics until the Daily Telegraph rubbed their noses in it.
10) Failure to acknowledge England is the only Nation of the UK without its own Parliament.
'Rant'!?
If it were any other Nation but the civilised, patient and lenient British there would 650+ heads on poles alongside the Thames by now!
Complain about this comment
i'm still not convinced the public gives one jot who the speaker of the house of commons is and that a lot of fuss is being made over what should be a position that doesn't attract attention.
www.fsnreportersblog.com
Complain about this comment
ikam @ 90
Failure by Messrs Brown, Cameron and Clegg to set an example - - all 3 had 'inadvertent' expense claims that were unworthy of people in such high office
good point, well made
Complain about this comment
Oh well!...at least the Iranians had the illusion of a vote for their leader!
Complain about this comment
#90 ikamaskeip
"10) Failure to acknowledge England is the only Nation of the UK without its own Parliament
If it were any other Nation but the civilised, patient and lenient British"
Presumably the "British" were OK with a UK Parliament. A majority of Scots, Welsh and Irish campaigned for their own Parliaments/Assemblies. If the English want their own Parliament, all they have to do is vote for it - not a difficult task!
If you want one, then don't blame any of the other nations in the UK, if you haven't bothered.
Complain about this comment
The manner and obviously spiteful, perverse spirit in which Bercow has been elected Speaker show clearly the character of the current membership of Parliament.
There these corrupt MPs remain, dug in for another year. Resentful, truculent, looking to grab what booty remains and self-justifying to the last. Their only regret is that they have been found out and will shortly be forced off the grtavy train.
Whether or not Bercow is any good as Speaker is beside the point. He's soiled goods. The first act of a new Parliament (when we actually get an election) must be to dismiss him immediately and replace him with a new face.
Please God, let this farce end soon.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
There is so much dissatisfaction expressed on this newslog, I am beginning to think it is caused by some kind of mass negative downward spiral triggered by the recession.
There was a lobby for a public inquiry into the Iraq war, it is partly granted, there are still grumbles, it seems no inquiry will be good enough.
There was a cry for the resignation of the speaker, he resigned.
A new speaker has been elected. Can he really be so unpopular after barely a day in office, that there is talk of getting rid of him already?
I have read everything contributors have written above and these lines from Samuel Beckett came into my mind:
"You cried for night. It falls. Now cry in the darkness."
Complain about this comment
saga 92
Very keen on your Cameron story, Saga, aren't you? But I'm starting to work out what has wound you up. It's the way he had a certain climbing plant torn down from his house, isn't it? I think you are concealing something from us all. Are you President of the Wisteria Preservation Society?
Complain about this comment
#69. At 5:39pm on 23 Jun 2009, Its_an_Outrage wrote:
Nope, sorry, I still don't quite geddit. We don't need another second-rate government, whichever side of the House they sit. Also, I'm afraid that this incessant shouting for an early general election is about as useful as a football chant. It's not going to happen. Let me explain. The decision can only be made by the government (or perhaps, admittedly, the Army), and as it's not in their interest to call an election at the monment, they are probably not going to.
-----------------------------------------------------------
It is clear that Brown is selling this country to Hell and back with his public sector borrowing. That means one way or another, we have to force a General Election this side of Christmas - preferably in the early autumn. I don't care what it takes, street protests, strikes in crucial energy industries, riots and mahem - we the people must force this Government to the polls!
It can be done - all it takes is force of will, tenacity and courage. Any Government only survives because the people let it!
Complain about this comment
#99 crowdedisland
(Actually, my bit of your "crowded island" isn't crowded at all, and our Government would welcome more immigration)
"Any Government only survives because the people let it!"
Nice to see you rejecting the English idea of Parliamentary Sovereignty and engaging with most of the rest of the world in the idea that sovereignty lies with the people.
Complain about this comment
Well, thats it then. Another unemployable (in the real world) gob-on-a-stick MuPpet is given his Buggins Turn at ripping off the taxpayer and protecting the all important interests of fellow MuPpets.
He thinks hes worth 100,000 a year , so will he take the pay cut from 144,000?
Once again, our Wrong Dishonourable MuPpets have mis-judged the public mood. Just what do we have to do to get these idiots to listen? Green bandanas and public demonstration? Even the Iranian Mullahs and President Ramadanadingdong are holding a (probably fixed) recount in the face of their own peoples public anger.
Only another few months of insufferable dictatorship and imbecilic edicts from the Mandelson /Brown/Balls cohort and then we can vote. I can only hope that they dont cause too much more damage.fat chance of that though.
One million dead in the First World War is regarded as a lost Generation. One million BNP voters in the last Euro-elections is regarded as a minor statistical hiccup. Wake up Parliament.
Lord help our youth, who will have to rectify the problems caused by this current political generation of immoral, incompetent, self serving, fraudulent low life scumbags who can see no further than their own bank balances.
Complain about this comment
What happens if an Independent stands against him at the next election, I presume that cannot be forbidden? I'd do it just to see his face, actually a few judicious comments on his views on how it was OK for him to flip and avoid Capital Gains tax (BTW for thoes posting earlier AVOIDANCE is legal, EVASION is not, sadly we plebs generally can only EVADE as we are not above the law) may well see me getting a satisfactory share of the vote. So if you live in his constituency I promise to take a different local darts team into the Commons bar each night Parliament sits, remember subsidised booze!, during the day I will take a different group of pensioners into the Commons canteens for subsidised lunches (and can they also have a fag (sorry Ciggie for all those Old Etonian MPs reading this!) at the same time? I seem to remember that its not just tax Laws that MPs are above?!
Complain about this comment
Nick
"a man who's spent 10 years plotting to get this job"
Obviously you don't like the guy but can you really substantiate this?
Complain about this comment
It appears that the UKs Creditors are being extremely benign and not sending in the bailiffs etc because they believe that the next Government will be Tory and will implement sensible economic policies including cuts to the Public Sector. So Brown is currently being propped up by the apparent inevitablilty of a Cameron Government. Now the interesting thing is, that to date, I don't believe there has even been a Prime Minister with such an unerring instinct for Killing a Golden Goose or shooting himself in the foot (Maybe thats why the NHS budget has spiralled) So I was wondering, how could he manage to pull from the fruits of victory , the Ashes of Defeat, and it suddenly occurred to me that he introduced a nice little time bomb for the Moonlighting Tories, in that shortly all Outside Jobs are to be published, and the the Tories are going to be taking the big hits then. What if that so damamged the Tories that all our Foreign Creditors thought, 'Hang on this Circus of a Government may get back in!" and then they pulled the plug, with expenses now curtailed I doubt Gordon would be able to claim for a new one, then what would be the fate of UK PLC? BY a certain irony I believe the Chinese are amongst our biggest creditors, how I bet they are praying (OK, so they're communist atheists, so lets say 'hoping') for less interesting times!
Complain about this comment
#102 althought it is traditional for the major parties (Lab, Con, Lib-Dem) not to put up parliamentary candidates against a siting speaker it is certainly not forbidden- so go ahead and I'll watch with interest on your progress. Given the reaction from some Tory MPs to John Bercow's election maybe the Tories will put up a candidate !
This happened to Michael Martin in 2005 where the SNP and some others stood against him. He still got 53% of the vote. (not sure what happned in 2001 - cant find the results)
Two independents also stood against Betty Boothroyd in 1997 but got no where.
Apparently many local voters rather like their MP being Speaker - it helps when they write letters on behalf of constitients to Minsisters !
And the Speaker is still an MP with constituency responsibilities. Michael Martin still did a weekly surgery in his constituency even when speaker.
Complain about this comment
#102 TheEnglishman
I presume you are referring to the English tradition (no more than that) that none of your "major" parties stands against the Speaker. At the last election one of our major parties (SNP) stood against the Speaker - as well as various minor ones.
Complain about this comment
39. At 2:44pm on 23 Jun 2009, Boilerplated wrote:
#31. At 2:08pm on 23 Jun 2009, kingrgs78 wrote:
"Ann Widdecombe was by far and away the choice of the public according to what I've read in various sources. But of course, in this game of pulling one over your opponents..//.."
Err, I think the real reason Miss Widdecombe didn't win might have been the fact that she had already made it known that she was leaving Parliament within the next 10 months (though she had made 'noises' about staying on but had not said she would, if I recall correctly), could it be that MPs were looking for a long term Speaker, knowing that reform of parliament, form, function and costs is not going to be a 'quick-fix'?...
==========
Bercow, not a 'Quick Fix' - well I suppose if he doesn't get opposed and kicked out at the next election the 'Quick' bit won't apply, so that leaves only the 'Fix'
Complain about this comment
bankslicker 93
"Oh well!...at least the Iranians had the illusion of a vote for their leader!"
I don't think you've thought this one through. A sham vote is worse than waiting a little while for a fair vote in my book.
101
"..muPpet..", "..muPpets.."
Very speakyourbranes!
T...otron?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
51. At 3:42pm on 23 Jun 2009, Its_an_Outrage wrote:
21. At 1:27pm on 23 Jun 2009, JohnConstable wrote:
Sooner or later there will be a General Election and I sincerely hope that the English public will consign most of these MP's to political history.
Indeed there will, and indeed they shall. The problem is, what dross, with even less experience and who is to say any more integrity will be there to replace them? What, precisely would a 'general election now' do to solve the problem? Same old electoral system, higher salaries, same old trough, just a different set of second-rate snouts. Or perhaps third-rate snouts.
And, to whoever it was that suggested that I stand for parliament. It's a great idea but it won't work. I'm a bit too old for the X-Factor circus that will be the next general election, I wouldn't get through it without taking a swing at a reporter, and anyway I probably couldn't do a better job than the incumbent Geraldine Smith.
I wouldn't mind getting my hands on all that loot though...I'll think about it.
===========
As the old joke goes - There is nothing like an open mind, and this is nothing like an open mind.
Complain about this comment
97. At 11:04pm on 23 Jun 2009, newtactic wrote:
There is so much dissatisfaction expressed on this newslog, I am beginning to think it is caused by some kind of mass negative downward spiral triggered by the recession.
There was a lobby for a public inquiry into the Iraq war, it is partly granted, there are still grumbles, it seems no inquiry will be good enough.
There was a cry for the resignation of the speaker, he resigned.
A new speaker has been elected. Can he really be so unpopular after barely a day in office, that there is talk of getting rid of him already?
I have read everything contributors have written above and these lines from Samuel Beckett came into my mind:
"You cried for night. It falls. Now cry in the darkness."
========
I think we cried for reform and a cleansing of Parliament, if you care to listen to MR Bercow, he objected to the fact the reporter said he'd HAD to pay his Capital Gains tax, Mr Bercow went on to say 'he had done nothing wrong and volunteered to pay it back, and that all MPs were honest'. So we cry as we might for night, all we have is a curtain over the window to keep the midday sun out - a cover up if you like. You might like it, I don't, as the only darkness it produces covers MPs behaviour. They're rotten and they should all go, mind you wait for the Tories to start copping it over moonlighting, Mr Bercow may turn out to be a very entertaining figure then, assuming of course he has nothing else to hide.
Complain about this comment
108 dhwilkinson
Not many have the guts to post on this site with their real name...
So with the greatest respect Sir (I presume Sir and not Madam)...I do not think YOU have thought this one through!
What's happening in Iran...is real Democracy! (yes...with a capital D)
I quote a HoC spokesperson on Radio 4 yesterday during the PM programme, concerning the voting procedure for the new Speaker of the HoC...'I apologise for the delay...but we are not used to holding elections here!'
I propose to you the following...
'A sham vote is infinitely better than a no vote!'
Please comment on the above statement (I know that sounds a bit naff!)
Complain about this comment
112 BankSlicker....
"A sham vote is infinitely better than a no vote!"
A sham vote isn't a vote. We will get a vote next year and they didn't get a vote but thought they did. There is no comparison. Its like putting your money in a sham bank is better than no bank at all. You'll become poor very quickly if you think that.
Because of our voting system many of our votes don't count you might consider that a sham but it's not a deliberate deception.
Complain about this comment
oldnat and #94.
Re, "..patient British.. if you want one (English Parliament), then don't blame any others, if you haven't bothered.."
Well, as this Article was on Bercow, Westminster Parliament etc. and my contribution on the 'failings' as I see them of Bercow, Parliament etc. and nowhere did I criticise or 'blame' the Scots, Welsh, Irish, I think you are being very unfair.
I can't help it you have a plank in each eye when it comes to England and the English: Obviously from birth you suffered terribly at the hands of the pernicious English, but, I believe there's a certain Party called SNP in a certain independent Parliament with its own tax-raising powers to whom you could address your complaint/blames and not me!
Complain about this comment
#100. At 11:47pm on 23 Jun 2009, oldnat wrote:
#99 crowdedisland
(Actually, my bit of your "crowded island" isn't crowded at all, and our Government would welcome more immigration)
"Any Government only survives because the people let it!"
Nice to see you rejecting the English idea of Parliamentary Sovereignty and engaging with most of the rest of the world in the idea that sovereignty lies with the people.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well I don't know where your bit of this crowded island is, but I take it is not in SE England which is now the most densely populated part of Europe with a severely overstretched infrastructure. But we digress. My point that "Any Government only survives because the people let it!" is a simple statement of fact - the idea of Parliamentary Sovereignty under the Crown only exists because the people have found it provided stable and reassuring governance.
Under the present shambles and in the light of the MPs expenses scandal, the shock the the government borrowing 20 billion per month and Brown's complete lack of any legitimacy whatsoever, I think the compact between people and Parliamentary Sovereignty has been well and truly broken. There is the whiff of insurrection in the air - you can smell it.
Complain about this comment
#100. At 11:47pm on 23 Jun 2009, oldnat
- should have looked at you name - evidently an SNP supporter. I love Scotland, but it always amuses me when Scots wag their fingers at the English over immigration. Let's get this straight - our part of the island is overcrowded - your part is under populated - therefore our interests in immigration are diametrically opposed. England has had enough when it comes to immigration and also when it comes to Scottish Labour ruining our affairs.
Complain about this comment
I was just savouring the rather delicious prospect contained in the last sentence of #90 and trying to deal with the whole concept that all the stuff that has been written about the iniquitous houses in Westminster Palace has apparently achieved nothing - I mean Speaker Bercow? What are our MPs on (apart from glorious salaries and expenses for doing very, very little)?
Do these MPs honestly believe that patronising angry people is going to make them go away? Do they not yet see the whole collapse of our democracy and structure because people will start pulling it down brick by brick? And for the sake of a penny pinching career?
Complain about this comment
With luck the New Speaker will force Brown to answer questions in PMQ's
Complain about this comment
Nick
Reading between the lines I get the feeling you are not overly impressed by Bercow. I would have thought you shared a kinship with him, having taken a similar political journey, from Tory to Labour. Or is that wide of the mark?
Complain about this comment
Apropos Mr Robinson's question in his trail for the expenses radio programme, yes, it has been rough justice. I once played John Proctor in The Crucible and it has felt just like Salem in the 1690s.
Of course, there has been abuse, but it should be remembered that, as I understand it, this was an allowance system rather than 'simple' expenses and rightly or wrongly MPs were apparently encouraged to play the system. I certainly wouldn't have cast the first stone.
Incidentally, surely a trouser press is a legitimate business expense.
A good story, DT, but it will be a while yet before we know whether it has been in the public interest.
Complain about this comment
Tory MP Nadine Dorries, has described the election of the new Speaker as "a two-fingered salute to the British people and the last hurrah of a dying Labour government."
Factually, as far as I can make out, the only Party which voted more or less along party lines was not Labour, or any other party, but the Tories themselves. And Labour MPs voted in significant numbers for the other guy. John Bercow was elected by support right across the House, except for nearly all Tories.
For a Party which expects to gain power at the next Election the Tory vote, and the public grumbling about Speaker Bercow, suggest a cavalier attitude to the separation of powers and constitutional niceties.
Prof. Colin Talbot (WhitehallWatch.wordpress.com)
Complain about this comment
re: #75 Boilerplated
"You mean, rather than all but the 'nose out of joint Tories' applauding Mr Bercow on his election there would have been all the Tories clapping whilst everyone else sat on their hands..."
In my post #72, I was referring to the reaction of the PUBLIC.
I was brought up to believe that parliament was there for the people, and not as a self-serving entity.
Complain about this comment
Met lots of people yesterday (aha!) and most thought Bercow looked like a teacher instead of a Speaker.
That's by the by, but there's something eirie about his appointment and how it happened. Two fingers up to the Tories indeed, but somebody tell Labour because they still don't get it do they:
LABOUR WILL BE WIPED OUT IN THE GENERAL ELECTION AND IT IS ALMOST A DEAD CERT. WE WILL GET SOME SANITY IN OUR LAND AGAIN WITH A CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT WHO HAVE TAKEN ON BOARD ALL LABOUR'S FAILINGS AND WILL NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES THEY MADE.
(Sorry for shouting but some people / Parties will never get it whichever way it's spelled out to them).
Complain about this comment
94. At 10:16pm on 23 Jun 2009, oldnat wrote:
#90 ikamaskeip
"10) Failure to acknowledge England is the only Nation of the UK without its own Parliament
If it were any other Nation but the civilised, patient and lenient British"
Presumably the "British" were OK with a UK Parliament. A majority of Scots, Welsh and Irish campaigned for their own Parliaments/Assemblies. If the English want their own Parliament, all they have to do is vote for it - not a difficult task!
If you want one, then don't blame any of the other nations in the UK, if you haven't bothered.
========================================================================
And how exactly can we 'vote for it' - A scot sat in No.10, has ripped the 'vote' page from the english dictionary. We can't vote on anything until he says so.
BTW - I have nothing against scots in general, I just thought it was somewhat ironic to tell the english it was our own fault when its a scottish PM wouldn't let us vote, and if it was up to england would never have been in power in the first place.
Complain about this comment
1. If he wants to implement reform, he should have allowed himself to be dragged to the chair in that stupid, masonesque (or is it Eton/Harrow/Oxon-esque?), manner.
2. What power does he actually have to reform anything?
3. If he wants to implement change, how about insisting that the other main parties challenge his seat at the next GE?
4. Why is the Speaker an MP's post? The Speakers role is basically a civil servean'ts post. That would be a better bet of political impartiallity, would do away with the farcical electioneering and political manoeuvring we just witnessed, and would be cheaper. It would also ensure that one party didn't lose one of its votes in parliament and that constituents actually had a MP who did his 'proper' duties.
5. Slightly off topic, but how do MPs manage to take second jobs whilst employing staff? Surely if you have time to do outside consultancy, you have time to do your own research?
Complain about this comment
Short of a revolution, not many people on this newslog are going to be happy with events during the months leading up to a general election. I find it interesting to see predictions as to the outcome, as if it will be fact. One positive outcome of the news coverage of the recent speaker election is the way in which the national media has covered the story, which suggests there may be less apathy about who governs us and what they intend to do. Dare I hope there will be a better turn out at the next election as a result?
Whilst many of us may be unhappy with our MPs, especially since their expenses/allowance abuses have been revealed, what seems to have had a negative effect on the reputation of the parliamentary system, may eventually have a positive effect on the number of the electorate who turn out to vote.
Complain about this comment
Totally agree with comments in 2.
It just sums up Labour's arrogance. Let's hope it backfires on them in a big way!
The Berco / Bradby interview last night showed Bercow to be a pretty weird guy.
Complain about this comment
Electing Mr Bercow to the speakers chair or an early General Election will not make a scrap of difference to Parliament.It's the system that is flawed.The members of parliament should have their main home and be made to live in their constituency and their parlimentary focus should be based on the needs of their constituents and not on the needs of the political party in power.For this to work the concept of "whipping" should be removed for all domestic issues that come through Parliament allowing MP's to vote for what is best for their constituents whatever the political leanings.It would then be the job of the speaker to make sure this process prevails.
Complain about this comment
121 ProfTalbot,
Draws attention to the fact that the Tories are not known as 'The Stupid Party ' for nothing. Two leading nominees for the speakership, one with a background in the looney right Monday Club, an organization that made the BNP look like Sunday School teachers, and another that said when asked a question about the homeless in London replied 'are those the people we step over when we leave the theatre' With the party led by ex members of the thuggish Bullingdon Club, I would imagine they are little more than a joke amongst informed opinion.
Complain about this comment
126. Newtactic.
Labour had burned their bridges and boats months ago with the arrival of the hamfisted Scot.
The expenses debacle has merely compounded and endorsed the public's feelings - but have you noticed that although Conservatives are equally guilty in the expenses abuse, they actually got the most votes in the European and Council elections?
One has to be careful not to say it is a fait accompli but it is almost a dead cert. the Conservatives are going to get in and that's why Labour are so crestfallen and desperate.
Time to move away now Labour and let other take power, you actually blew it, do you know that? er, probably not - still in DENIAL even as they go to the gallows.
Complain about this comment
129. At 09:30am on 24 Jun 2009, braveSouter wrote:
121 ProfTalbot,
Draws attention to the fact that the Tories are not known as 'The Stupid Party ' for nothing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blimey ! i would love to know what the Labour party are known as ...
Complain about this comment
127, I too saw the ITN interview with Bercow and he, Bercow, did himself no favours. His true self was not a pretty sight was it?
I happen to think ITN is a better news service and not tied to the government like the BBC. ITN's coverage in Afghanistan and Islamabad last night was absolutely First Class.
BBC news and reporters are recruited from left leaning universities. Adrian Chiles and his silly childish programme are typical BBC.
Complain about this comment
99. At 11:13pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
...one way or another, we have to force a General Election this side of Christmas - preferably in the early autumn. I don't care what it takes, street protests, strikes in crucial energy industries, riots and mahem - we the people must force this Government to the polls!...
I've seen riots and mayhem from close range. Be very careful what you wish for.
Complain about this comment
129. At 09:30am on 24 Jun 2009, braveSouter wrote:
121 ProfTalbot,
Draws attention to the fact that the Tories are not known as 'The Stupid Party ' for nothing.
------------------
Oh dear, someoene getting in a quick post in between lessons.
Its comforting to know that someone who on another thread accused a fellow poster of being infantile can still pull out the "you're stupid" line of attack.
Your contributions are nothing but bile filled rhetorical nonsense, if you could only comprehend the contempt you draw down upon yourself with your seething "must... attack.... Tories..." approach I am sure you would be embarrassed.
Anyone else heard the Tories referred to as "The Stupid Party" by anyone except Souter?
Complain about this comment
So much for 'radical reform', then! OK, I'm fed up and disillusioned. But that won't change anything. So what can I do?
Here are my suggestions for the next election, for what they're worth.
1. Remember, it's OK to be angry. Keep saying it. Keep being angry.
2. Don't abstain. Apathy means they get away with it for ever.
3. Wherever a 'tainted' MP stands, organise a local, 'anti-sleaze' candidate and vote for them.
Like it? Do it! Don't like it? Improve it! (But keep it simple.) There's just time if we start now.
Complain about this comment
129. braveSouter
"and another that said when asked a question about the homeless in London replied 'are those the people we step over when we leave the theatre"
=
Aren't you getting this confused with an alleged remark made by Prince Charles?
Besides, I think it's pretty decent of them to make the effort to avoid stepping on them, don't you?
Complain about this comment
This quote of the day was lifted from the Guido website:
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told Siyasat-e-Ruz newspaper
Brown is one of the most inefficient politicians of England who has witnessed cases of financial corruption in his cabinet and has moved his country towards collapse and destruction
A comment like that, and our government wants us to believe that we have influence in that part of the world. Can you really see a successful outcome to the British hostages held in Iraq?
Complain about this comment
137. excellentcatblogger
Manchester United probably has more influence than the UK government in that part of the world. Or anywhere.
Complain about this comment
No134
Try J S Mill the great English Philosopher and economist. He is a refreshing contrast to the halved baked, politically backward Tory bigots that attempt to 'swamp' this and other forums.
Complain about this comment
134
Better now??
I'm too old for playground name-calling but I share his underlying puzzlement.
It is generally accepted that another Labour speaker would have been flying in the face of convention and that the new Speaker would be non-Labour.
For this individual to gather cross-party support, he or she would need to be from somewhere nearer the middle of the road - socially and politically- rather than the edges. If the Conservatives took such exception to Bercow - who from the outset was always fairly clear that he wanted the job - then why did they not come up with an alternative moderate who could command bi-partizan support? Why did they persist with a slate of MPs which (with the exception of Miss "only till the end of parliament" Widdicombe) represented the Tory past rather than the Tory future?
Or, even in desperation, why did they not rally around Beith once Bercow started to hit his stride.
Finally, I'm surprised Bercow took the job if he fears losing it in a political coup a year or less hence. If we are to expect this huge Conservative landslide at the next election, what Conservative MP, already sitting pretty on a nice majority in leafy Bucks (or wherever) would turn down six years' job security for a year of wearing funny clothes to the sound of knife-sharpening in his left ear?
Complain about this comment
How will MPs be able to tell when this man is standing up?
Complain about this comment
Thats "half" baked old chap, don't forget to go to your English Lesson.
By JS Mill, are you referring to the 19th century civil servant? I am sure you can not possibly be comparing any party today to the then Tory party, which actually did consist of the aristocrats you seem to believe still make up its members today.
Interestingly, the Whigamore party as it was then has far more in common with the present day Tories than it does the Labour party. But I won't bore you with the details, I'm sure you would much prefer to just fling out some more random slurs at people who have the timerity to point out the gaping flaws in your thinking.
Complain about this comment
140 Fingertapper
I actually don't have a huge problem with Bercow as speaker. I would question some of the motives behind him being there, it smacks of a duplicitous attempt at appeasement of the Tories who would not accept a 3rd "openly" labour politician, but in all honesty, it doesn't really make the blindest bit of difference. If he makes Brown answer the occasional question in PMQ's, it will be a big step up, but other than that I wouldn't have expected miracles from any of them. Would have liked to see Widecomb, but I'll confess only from the fun of watching her ruffle some feathers and step on some toes.
And as for "better now", no not really. I just find Souter's approach extremely objectionable and ignorant, I think it is important that someone should point out to him how he comes accross. But I am always happy to engage in reasoned debate with others, as long as they can do likewise.
Complain about this comment
139. braveSouter
I don't think JS would have been very impressed with our current authoritarian government.
Complain about this comment
127
The Berco / Bradby interview last night showed Bercow to be a pretty weird guy.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Yes I thought that it showed him refusing to be honest and face up to reality.
He is just a vehicle for Labour to stick it to the Tories
a pawn blinded by his selfserving personality.
The need to make a fresh start with the people was way down his and the Labour Parties list.
If he does not enjoy support across the house then he is a lame duck from the start.
We will see how he handles Brown at PMQs if he can't stop Brown's none answers and avoidance then he is toast.
Complain about this comment
139. At 10:26am on 24 Jun 2009, braveSouter wrote:
No134
Try J S Mill the great English Philosopher and economist. He is a refreshing contrast to the halved baked, politically backward Tory bigots that attempt to 'swamp' this and other forums.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a little charmer you are Souter
Complain about this comment
#138 theblamegame
Very accurate but also very sad. We are now plumbing new depths in the UK and worldwide.
Complain about this comment
#89
"Boilerplated has posted 12 times on this one blog, yet do not see the irony in complaining about this blog turning into a "rantathon"!, I see a new job as an MP opening up for Boilerplated!."
Very true, but they are all talking about or replying to the subject of Nicks blog, not just rants calling for a "general election NOW!", it's one thing to debate and it's another just to keep going on about a 'pet hate' that isn't even the subject of the blog...
Complain about this comment
N0143
Only a fool could think that a 'Chairman' of a meeting could make someone answer a question other than in the way he thinks is appropriate.
Complain about this comment
Style ??
Over substance ??
Complain about this comment
48. At 3:22pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
"Take to the streets and demand an election - it is the only way!"
Such protests would be 'managed' by the authorities and would be sympathised with but ignored. "After all, while we do listen to the people, there are laws that have to be obeyed ...blah ...blah ... blah".
What do you think would happen if there was serious civil disorder on the streets of the UK?
Let me suggest that the police and the armed forces would be given all sorts of (allegedly temporary) 'emergency powers' that would allow them to detain rioters under the terrorism legislation, enforce curfews etc., etc.
Look back to the days of the big CND protests - the days of water canons being used on civil protesters - or the way the miners' strike protests were 'managed' or Wapping, or .... well there's quite a lot of examples really.
In a situation where the government had evoked 'emergency powers' - for the sake of the general law abiding society and to protect business and other assets - they would lay aside the need for the General Election until there was civil stability, using the fact that you cna't have a 'safe' election with all this disorder going on.
Rioting on the streets will just ensure you have the present government for longer.
The system is completely 'fixed' - the ones in power always win, except when, on few and far between occasions, the people do get a chance to vote in a general election. Even then, if so many people are cynical of the democratic system (and/or the integirty of the politicians) that only thirty odd per cent bother to vote - what's the real benefit of that?
And remember, if only 1 per cent of people bother to vote, that doesn't make the elected MPs or any government they form or any prime minister they choose 'illegal'.
In fact, if only one person voted in each constituency, Parliament could 'carry on as normal' - at least legally.
The point is the democratic, parliamentary and political systems of this country were devised in an era when politics mattered to most people and not using your vote would have been seen as something reprehensible or at minimum, civilly irresponsible.
That attitude and culture all changed. Large numbers of people now view that "they're all a waste of space'. But the systems have not changed.
Complain about this comment
Souter, Most people are not one party for life.
I imagine I am fairly typical of many who post on here. I was born in '76, so the first GE I could vote in was 1997, but I took a lot of interest in 1992 as well. I grew up in a family that traditioanlly voted Conservative, and, had I had a vote in 1992, would have voted Conservative. By '97, the Tory party was in disarray on a number of issues and had lost all moral authority (sound familiar?). Perhaps they had simply been in charge for too long. For that reason I believed there was need for change and voted for the charasmatic T Blair.
I still believe that was the right choice and that the Labour party did a good job in its first term. As such I voted Labour again in 2001. By 2005, the Labour govt had been a mixed bag, some good some bad. But the Tory party was still not quite as electable in my view (lots in infighting and changes of leader) so, somewhat more reluctantly, I voted Labour again (and Blair promised to remain in post until the end of the parliament!).
As such, I have never 'lost' an election, and I think I am a good barometer - a one man poll. I am not a glory seeker, but an open minded voter not tied to one party through some sense of loyalty or historic prejudice.
I can assure you that there is no way on this earth that I will vote for Labour whilst Brown is in charge. In fact, there is nothing Labour can do to make me vote for them this time around, nor probably the time after. They have left the country a financial ruin, are every bit as sleazy (and therefore more hypocritical) than the Tories and have simply run out of ideas. I strongly believe the Labour party are putting their own needs/wants for power above the needs of the country and that is simply unforgivable. Cameron, on the other hand, seems like a decent chap with drive, determination and compassion. I would also far rather he represented me on the world stage than the unbeleivably gauche Brown.
Complain about this comment
129;
SOUTEER
To call the Monday club worse than the BNP disqualifies you from any form of reasoned debate on this forum. Try harder not to let your ignorance inform your logic!
Complain about this comment
133. At 09:50am on 24 Jun 2009, Its_an_Outrage wrote:
"99. At 11:13pm on 23 Jun 2009, crowdedisland wrote:
...one way or another, we have to force a General Election this side of Christmas - preferably in the early autumn. I don't care what it takes, street protests, strikes in crucial energy industries, riots and mahem - we the people must force this Government to the polls!...
I've seen riots and mayhem from close range. Be very careful what you wish for."
People would be well advised to heed Its_an_Oturage's advice.
For sure, many people are outraged, angry, disillusioned, frustrated - but whatever you do, stop to think out the consequences and sequels of your actions and consider what effect it will really have.
It could yet, actually, all become a lot worse.
Complain about this comment
#107. At 00:30am on 24 Jun 2009, TheEnglishman wrote:
"Bercow, not a 'Quick Fix' - well I suppose if he doesn't get opposed and kicked out at the next election the 'Quick' bit won't apply, so that leaves only the 'Fix'"
I said "[the] reform of parliament, form, function and costs is not going to be a 'quick-fix'".
My point was that Ann Widdecombe had previously announced that she was intending to leave Parliament at the next election - of course a sitting Speaker could loose their seat or (as Speaker Martin found out) loose the confidence of the house - electing a 'stand-in' now with only 10 months to a general election would have probably done nothing but delay any reforms until after the next election - also many may well have seen Miss Widdecombe's actions as a means to be promoted to the Lords upon her retirement (or is that being far to cynical?)...
Complain about this comment
#116 crowdedisland
Exactly right. I have a fondness for the villages of SE England, but I do find the whole area somewhat claustrophobic due to the concentration of people. One of the many reasons why our two countries need to take different attitudes to immigration.
Complain about this comment
It seems obvious, after the Speaker debacle, that whichever party comes into power at the next general election, it will be business as usual with just a few tweaks of the parliamentary system to pacify the public.
Most Independents won't even get a look in. There are few Martin Bells.
Consider this scenario. If most of the electorate decided not to go along with this charade, and refused to vote, and less than 10% did, what would happen?
Complain about this comment
#124 sweetAnybody
I wasn't talking about whether you vote for an English Parliament in 2009 or 2010! I'd been voting for a Scottish Parliament for over 30 years, before the SNP were a sufficient threat to Labour to scare them into passing the legislation.
England has the huge majority of the UK population. If you want your own Parliament, you could have it at the next election - unlike the smaller nations, you don't have to wait till MPs of another nation vote for it.
Whether you would want to have a UK Parliament as well, would be up to you.
Complain about this comment
#122
"In my post #72, I was referring to the reaction of the PUBLIC.
I was brought up to believe that parliament was there for the people, and not as a self-serving entity."
But with respect, what public reaction?! Most will not have (at the time of your comment) seen the new Speaker in action never mind made a judgement, and only his own constituents will know much about the man as a person. Any judgements the public are making will be off the backs of other MPs, such as Tory MPs sitting on their hands and looking stony faced (no doubt had Bercow gained rapturous applause from the Tory benches many of the negative comments here and elsewhere would be quite the opposite) or comments from the likes of Nick Robinson and his reports/blogs etc.
Complain about this comment
On the question of expenses,
Can you ask Brown next time you interview him, why if he is so apposed to flipping he allowed the change to MP's Tax rules effectivily giving them 2 primary residances in capital ganes Tax terms (both with 100% releif regardless of period of ownership and time lived in them)?
As a secondary Question could he also name the MP's that lobbied him/the treasuray for the change (Im assuming it was MP's as the Tax change only effects them and someone must have lobbied or asked for the change).
Complain about this comment
" 139. At 10:26am on 24 Jun 2009, braveSouter wrote:
No134
Try J S Mill the great English Philosopher and economist. He is a refreshing contrast to the halved baked, politically backward Tory bigots that attempt to 'swamp' this and other forums.
----------------------------------------------------------------------"
It is indeed perceived wisdom amongst the left wing that any opinion that differs from theirs, even if they are in a tiny minority in holding theirs, must be the opinion of a 'bigot'.
Such a stance enables the left wing to avoid actually having to come up with a sound argument to support what they believe in.
Complain about this comment
"160. At 11:42am on 24 Jun 2009, wombateye wrote:
On the question of expenses,
Can you ask Brown next time you interview him, why if he is so apposed to flipping he allowed the change to MP's Tax rules effectivily giving them 2 primary residances in capital ganes Tax terms (both with 100% releif regardless of period of ownership and time lived in them)?"
You might also lob in a question involving moral compasses, the court of public opinion and Harriet Harman's claim that her sister's spare bedroom was her principal residence.
Of course, all you'd get by way of reply is a barrage of tractor production statistics and a bit of gurning.
Complain about this comment
151 Sutara
1% or just 1 voter per constituent would make the general election legal but what authority would the chosen party have?
Great Britain, and the 'mother of all parliaments', would be humiliated.
That's why I think compulsory voting has been discussed. This would force people to vote, thereby making the outcome more legitimate.
Complain about this comment
161. At 11:54am on 24 Jun 2009, AndyC555 wrote:
" 139. At 10:26am on 24 Jun 2009, braveSouter wrote:
No134
Try J S Mill the great English Philosopher and economist. He is a refreshing contrast to the halved baked, politically backward Tory bigots that attempt to 'swamp' this and other forums.
----------------------------------------------------------------------"
It is indeed perceived wisdom amongst the left wing that any opinion that differs from theirs, even if they are in a tiny minority in holding theirs, must be the opinion of a 'bigot'.
Such a stance enables the left wing to avoid actually having to come up with a sound argument to support what they believe in.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is certainly how brown comes across at the moment - he seems to feel that anything except what he thinks will ruin the country. Democracy isn't relevent when you just feel you have the moral high ground and no one else gets it.
Complain about this comment
#161 right on.
social justice and fairness and the Family Courts please discuss this
from the lefts point of view because they do not want too.
They avoid it at all costs because Nulabour have presided over this "mess" for the last 12 years and it cannot be blmaed on anyone else
other than themselves ?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
oldnat @ 158
You are perfectly correct in saying that if the English want it, they could have their own Parliament very soon.
However, my fellow English people have, to date, politically speaking, been spineless, supine and pathetic, which is why we English have been kicked from pillar to post by the politicians at Westminster.
Even they (the politicians at Westmonster) privately cannot believe it.
I hope that the English people have finally woken up from their long political slumbers but I'm not so sure they really have.
The English really are a docile, compliant lot in the political sense and are so ignorant, politically speaking that some of them end up voting for the BNP rather than say, the English Democrats.
And now, it is likely that they will simply vote out Labour, and via buggins turn, allow 'Dave' and his priviledged chums to fill the boots.
That ain't right but I suppose it will be the final straw for the Scots and so thanks to the Scots, possibly in November 2010, we English will get independence, though not through any effort of our own.
I wonder why the English behave like this - so incredibly lazy that is, politically speaking.
Complain about this comment
Re: #159 Boilerplated
It is dangerous to patronise the public with "parliament knows best" messages, especially now that the reputation of said parliament is so damaged.
The public liked Ms. Widdecombe.
They were not over enthusiastic about a less well known politician with volatile leanings and some involvement with the expenses scandal.
Complain about this comment
Wel;l Just watch PMQ..... so the speaker is a safe hand at the tiller..... I saw almost no change from Mr Martin!
Complain about this comment
Nick robinson wrote:
"He defends his own past expense claims insisting that he paid back money voluntarily to cover the tax he had saved after "flipping" his home designation."
....so the morally bereft MP now gets to ensure the other morally bereft MP's all act in accordance with socially moral guidelines.
They must think the public are REALLY STUPID. Are you lot all going to stand for this?
Complain about this comment
I can't get to enthusiastic about this new Speaker, he seems like a reversed Oswald Mosley; he has started at the Right and drifted to the Left, instead of starting at the Left and drifting to the Right.
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson wrote:
"The new Speaker told me that he favours greater transparency over MPs' expenses when I asked him whether he would reverse the decision to black out much of the information about who claimed what."
...so let me get this right Nick, you asked " whether he would reverse the decision to black out much of the information about who claimed what"
...and the new 'transparent speaker' replied
"he favours greater transparency over MPs' expenses"
THAT'S NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION - WHY DO YOU WEAK REPORTERS LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT? YOU ARE OUR ONLY VOICE AGAINST THESE CRIMINALS AND YOU'RE NOT EVEN TRYING.
Is he going to reverse the blanking out of expenses or what?
I admire you Nick Robinson, but don't pretend to be a journalist when you're not getting straight answers to straight questions. That's called being a 'spokesperson'.
Until journalists start doing their job properly then the public have to assume you are all in the same club and working against the people of this country and repressing true Democracy.
The answer should have been YES or NO - come on Nick, don't loose your morals in the cess pit of Parliment - remember you are human and want answers too - just like us.
If the new speaker cannot answer a straight question with a straight answer then he is clearly as slippery and as sneaky as any other MP who ran for the post.
You cannot clean anything - if you don't understand what clean is to begin with.
Complain about this comment
#19 Boilerplated wrote
"We, or more to the point you, don't have to, there is nothing to stop you standing for parliament, putting your case to your chosen hustings and then if elected putting your case to your fellow MPs."
...except the £25000 bond that you have to put up which will be lost if you don't get the minimum number of votes.
Don't be fooled into the lie that 'anyone can get involved' - if you're planning to stand as an independent then you will have to be fairly wealthy and take a lot of personal risk (or take a bung from an unscrupilous rich man).....which is exactly how politics became corrupt in the first place.
Complain about this comment
Why wasn't there a question at PMQs to bring out the glorious success of the immigration project that has cost £1m to help repatriate 1 whole family of failed asylum seekers? It seems absurd to criticise this as another example of Labour wasting money. Don't people realise that "valuable lessons have been learned" and that the next project set up with the next £1m of taxpayers' money can learn from this. Besides, a good number of civil servants had jobs and I'm sure the Director of the project will get a bonus for his achievements and another project to work on while he heads towards his gold-plated taxpayer funded pension.
OK, when it was set up it was intended to deal with 260 families but that's not the point. The NEXT project will set out to deal with 520 families so that's a 100% increase in targets which is a success in itself. When will the moaners stop moaning?
Complain about this comment
Post 162:
It is indeed perceived wisdom amongst the left wing that any opinion that differs from theirs, even if they are in a tiny minority in holding theirs, must be the opinion of a 'bigot'.
Such a stance enables the left wing to avoid actually having to come up with a sound argument to support what they believe in.
This is the most sound post I have read in a long time and sums up perfectly the left in this and every other country.
As to the speaker, the only election the public cares about is a General one.
Brown out now or out in May, why make the country suffer any longer?
Complain about this comment
On the shores of the Thames the Westmonster sprawls.
With gluttonous greed, devouring the soul of the nation.
In the depths of it's belly, parasitic government crawls.
Rending tearing, gnawing, chewing, in euphoric elation.
Wriggling, writhing, a blood bloated worm, sticky and Brown,
Wretched and wanton, minions gorge on the flesh of the beast.
In the belly of the Monster, the cry of Britannia lost and alone.
Financially fat, Brown worms waggle and war and endlessly feast.
Complain about this comment
andyC555 @ 162
So that is Mr. Browns secret, a barrage of tractor production statistics and a bit of gurning.
The English people will eventually look back upon this time as a political aberration and will wonder why on earth we let politicians mostly from another country (Scotland) run our affairs for so long.
We English can have a great future as we are a quirky, inventive bunch but our future is predicated upon having a sensible, modern, truly representative political system, which we certainly do not enjoy at present.
Complain about this comment
jrp @ 98
while cruelty to wisteria is indeed a crime, I was actually referring to "That Which We Are Forbidden To Discuss" a.k.a. The Mortgage - better leave it there, I think - hush hush, no names no pack drill, you know what I mean?
bell @ 152
I have never 'lost' an election, and I think I am a good barometer
you sure are! ... don't know we don't just ask you and, you know, do away with the General Election ... save ourselves a heap of time and trouble
Complain about this comment
#168. At 12:37pm on 24 Jun 2009, expatinnetherlands wrote:
Re: #159 Boilerplated
It is dangerous to patronise the public with "parliament knows best" messages, especially now that the reputation of said parliament is so damaged.
Of which I never did...
"The public liked Ms. Widdecombe.
In your opinion... As for patronising, do not patronise the public yourself, do not try to speak for the public, if you want to do that then stand for public office - or at least commission an opinion poll!
They were not over enthusiastic about a less well known politician with volatile leanings and some involvement with the expenses scandal."
Arh, we get to the crux, he doesn't fit your political views so must be bad, remind me how many times Churchill 'crossed the floor of the house' (something Bercow have not done), and as for the expenses scandal, mud slinging about something that wasn't against the rules nor illegal will get you nowhere.
Complain about this comment
169. At 12:46pm on 24 Jun 2009, wombateye wrote:
"Well Just watch PMQ..... so the speaker is a safe hand at the tiller..... I saw almost no change from Mr Martin!"
Can I ask, are you hard of hearing, perhaps you are if you've been listening to PMQ's for the last 10 years or so, for once not only could one hear the Speaker but both the questions and answers!
Complain about this comment
I thought the Speaker did okay. When a planted questioner from The Labour side brought up Tory policy as part of his question he was warned that The P.M. needn't comment on Opposition policy. In his closing remarks he also reminded Ministers that policy statements should not be made outside The House, a thinly veiled rebuke directed towwards The P.M. for making his statement on MPs Expensews policy via the media that very day.
Complain about this comment
We need to get a few things straight and dispell some of the myths the politically motivated are throwing around this blog.
"The Government wrecked the public finances"
Whilst no fan of the Government, this isn't true. The system of Capitalism wrecked the public finances when it decided to collapse (again) and destroy all the projections of growth - hitting tax receipts and other forms of Government income. It wouldn't have mattered if Labour, the Tories, the Lib dems or the Monster raving loony party was in power - IT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED ANYWAY. The most simple Economic analysis will tell you this. Some argue we're worse off than other countries - but again this is not due to the Governments handling of the situation, but the fact that Great Britain (along with the US) are the most Developed Capitlaist nation (The development of Capitalism that is). We run the fastest, so we are going to get hurt most when we fall.
"We need and election to clean out parliment"
Again, I am keen to rid us all of these parasites, but a General election now will not resolve this as there hasn't been enough time for the alternatives to get organised. I have no independent MP in my constituency yet and I would be left with the choice of Labour, Conservative or Lib Dem - all of which have been involved in the expenses scandals. This wil be the same for many people up and down the country. If you want to see the vermin ousted - there needs to be an alternative.
"Independents are ineffective - or they are a waste of your vote"
This is a line spun out of the main parties to scare you into sticking with them. The reality is that many councils up and down the land work outside of party bias and they end up participating in something unfamiliar to parliment - DEBATE.
This is GOOD FOR POLITICS as it means the people discussing the matter must actually think about what they are debating (rather than blindly following the party line) - it also promotes the representative to have to think about how his constituents might feel about it (and not his party leader / whip).
"Rioting on the streets will just ensure you have the present government for longer"
This idea is madness, no Government in history has been able to curtail the will of it's population once freedom has been tasted. One thing you can be 100% certain of is the majority of the population would rather die than live under an oppressive regime - I don't need a survey for that fact. It took a few weeks of civil disobedience for the Tories to reverse their poll tax (which was only a tax remember, not repression) and shortly afterwards the architect of that tax was removed by her own party. As the Russians found out in 1917 - the police, army and other authorities all remember they were humans before they became agents of the state so defections and disobedience occur rapidly thereby undermining the power the Government can wield.
What we need is abot more honesty - otherwise we make the same mistakes as our electorate by reverting to unfounded reactionary twaddle to support our arguments. No standing MP from any party is clean - even the ones who didn't claim excessively - because they all collectively voted to keep the information secret from us - making them implicit in the conspiracy against the will of the public.
Complain about this comment
167. At 12:20pm on 24 Jun 2009, JohnConstable wrote:
"oldnat @ 158
You are perfectly correct in saying that if the English want it, they could have their own Parliament very soon."
And just how are the 'English' people going to achieve that then? By demanding it on some BBC blog? I don't think so.
By rioting on the streets? I don't think that will actually cause any change.
The "English" have no power to change the parliamentary arrangements, any more than you have, John.
In case you haven't worked it out, the question is - just what is in it for the allegedly 'honourable' Members of the Westminster Parliament to put through legislation that would achieve that?
To me it sounds like it would just jeopardise the Westminster Paliamentary status quo - that they are desperately seeking to maintain - and indeed risk them having even less power, authority and purpose by being sandwiched between the European Parliament and FOUR national assemblies/parliaments. At least at the moment they can pretend to run most of the country in population terms.
What is absolutely clear is that the current UK Government won't be going down that road this side of the next general election.
Complain about this comment
173. At 1:04pm on 24 Jun 2009, writingsonthewall wrote:
"...except the 25000 bond that you have to put up which will be lost if you don't get the minimum number of votes.
Think you mean £500 (Five Hundred pounds), were do you get the your suggested "£25000" (Twenty Five THOUSAND pounds)?...
[quote: from (changes to) "Representation of the People Act 1985"]
(https://www.hmso.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1985/cukpga_19850050_en_1)
Deposits and expenses at elections
13 Deposit by candidates at parliamentary elections
In Schedule 1 to the principal Act (parliamentary elections rules)
(a)in rule 9(1) (nomination not valid unless £150 deposited with the returning officer) for £150 there shall be substituted £500; and
(b)in rule 53(4) (forfeiture of deposit where a candidate has polled not more than one-eighth of the total votes) for one-eighth there shall be substituted one-twentieth.
[unquote]
Complain about this comment
181 and others.
Agreed, I think Bercow handled his first PMQs pretty well. After PMQs he reiterated how he wanted MPs to conduct themselves during debates and as Nick said on the DP show, it only now remains to be seen if he can enforce those points when things get really heated.
Complain about this comment
182. At 1:44pm on 24 Jun 2009, writingsonthewall wrote:
Independents are ineffective - or they are a waste of your vote"
This is a line spun out of the main parties to scare you into sticking with them. The reality is that many councils up and down the land work outside of party bias and they end up participating in something unfamiliar to parliment - DEBATE.
==============================
i'm sorry, i have to didsagree - independants may have some success at local council level, as you say, but at westminster the party political system keeps them entirely frozen out.
when was the last time you heard an independant speak in PMQs, let alone a real policy debate?
Complain about this comment
"writingsonthewall wrote:
We need to get a few things straight and dispell some of the myths the politically motivated are throwing around this blog.
"The Government wrecked the public finances"
Whilst no fan of the Government, this isn't true. The system of Capitalism wrecked the public finances when it decided to collapse (again) and destroy all the projections of growth - hitting tax receipts and other forms of Government income"
I've forgotten, who was it raking in tax receipts during the 'good years', spending it all, not paying off national debt and giving us nothing to show for it?
Who was it making all those projections, seemingly based on the premise that the good times would last for ever (something that has never, ever, ever happened before)whilst telling us he was a financial collosus/genius?
And as it's a world-wide problem could you do me a favour and run through the list of other countries that will be borrowing more over the next two years than they have over the last 300 added together?
And who, when they talk about a fiscal stimulus, still don't trust the public with their own money, thinking that only they know how to spend it wisely so they'll take even more off us in taxes?
Complain about this comment
163. At 11:58am on 24 Jun 2009, worldlian wrote:
"151 Sutara
1% or just 1 voter per constituent would make the general election legal but what authority would the chosen party have?"
Who cares?
What 'authority' has anyone got to change it? The only people who can legally pass new laws to change the system are ...... yep, that's right, the legally elected members of Parliament.
However ridiculously low the voter turnout at any election might be.
However outraged people may be won't suddenly give them the mandate to change the current law about elections and democracy.
The system is self-perpetuating. It's a legal 'closed loop'. There's not end-point which we can just wait reassured that once a particular time arrives we will be able to have a fresh start at the whole thing. The next election just throws us all into the next loop of the circle.
(And I'll bet Gordon Brown's allegedly radical new arrangements for parliament don't address that fundamental problem!!!!)
As a system, it was o.k. and worked(ish) some decades ago, but time and changes in societal attitudes have overtaken it. Even the very idea of 'voting' for anything was once kind of sacrosanct and special. Now every major TV programme has it.
Complain about this comment
#184 Boilerplated
Apologies - the £25000 is to register as a party and you're right about the £500.
However, you will never win in your own constituency without a campaign - or nobody will know who you are - and that costs a LOT of money. Unless you are out of work, knocking the thousands of doors yourself is going to be too much to do - you will have to employ people to do that (or persuade them to volunteer).
In addition to this you will need to have a friend in the mainstream media and they tend to stick tot he party candidates (in the London Mayoral election there were about 8 candidates - but we only ever saw 3 on TV during the entire campaign).
....and finally £500 is still a hefty barrier for many people, to have that much money to 'gamble' removes a large proportion of the population, no matter how strongly they feel about changing the current system.
My point is that standing for parliment is not openly available to all men and women as often stated as a defense for moaning about the current system.
Currently I would stand a good chance as an independent in my constituency because at the very least I LIVE IN IT - unlike our current encumbant who actually lives over 100 miles away! However without being able to publicise this fact I would loose to the giant party driven PR machines.
Complain about this comment
I thought the speaker did OK. It was an understated performance, and without too much effort he could have stolen the show. Asking for silence during questions and answers was a winner - I have often found it difficult to hear Nick Clegg speak and other MPs distant from the despatch box.
The move to have more succinct questions and replies could backfire as depending on who is chosen may expose the shallowness of the pool of talent in the Commons. MPs would then find it very hard to justify allowances never mind pay increases if bankbenchers are inarticulate and unable to put together a cogent argument. Planted questions are unoriginal and their delivery is poor.
Nick, you made a good point in the Daily Politics show in that broadcast media leads the news in the morning which drives the rest of the day, so an afternoon anouncement in the HoC chamber may never generate the headlines it would have otherwise have done. The counter argument to that though is much of the legislation passed by New Labour is spun to such an extent that the truth is only unravelled days later when the small print sees the light of day. Therefore a balance is required between "selling headline grabbing news" and the nitty gritty truth.
PS in the exchanges between Cameron and Brown, the former has all but called Brown a liar which in the chamber is sacrilege. My query is: does the word liar need to be in the sentence, or is even the implication/inferrence sufficient for the Speaker to step in.
Complain about this comment
InvaderZim.
I know you like to get into literary mode and at times it is diverting, however, it is in the main exceedingly irritating. That said it is your right/write and thus fully entitled to be on here.
My proviso: It is possible others have suggested you have talent, but, if they said that of your poetry they were unfortunately well wide of the mark. Poetic license will only stretch to allowing you the effort at patterns of expectation, and nothing more...
Prose uses the medium of language while poetry serves language and explores it.
Study etymology and the works of Ezra Pound, E.E. Cummings, Seamus Heaney before you next try to encompass Britain and Brown: Such sweeping topics need more than purposeless, forced rhyme.
So, then you may take the line of Derek Walcott,
"..if loving these islands must be my load,
out of corruption my soul takes wing.."
From: Adios, Carenage
And know it for the richness and tapestry of rhymes falling where they fall, the effect on the ear and on the imagination.
Complain about this comment
190.
Brown *is* a liar. How he can get up and spout a loud of mendacious misleading statistics and get away with it is beyond me. the problem is that journalists never push him on this. Like an irritating robot he just ploughs on regardless.
Complain about this comment
181 Sicilian
I have to agree with you but perhaps with a little more enthusiasm, I thought Bercow was a breath of fresh air he gently let it be known that he was not going to have no nonsense, I think as the weeks go by he will grow in stature and bring the house of commons back from the playground mentality that has existed in the last twenty to thirty years,I also apprediate that he's nobodies man, much to many of the tories chagrin,
lets hope that he can bring the house into the twenty first century without destoying to much of the tradition.
Complain about this comment
#189. At 2:09pm on 24 Jun 2009, writingsonthewall wrote:
"However, you will never win in your own constituency without a campaign - or nobody will know who you are - and that costs a LOT of money"
Hmm, but then if you raise your profile in the constituency before the election (thus giving you four or five years to get your name and photo in the local newspapers etc.) and thus support you will have no problems in raising both support and donations - of course, you are quite correct, both the deposit and campaigning structure does put off if not prevent publicities and crack-pots who are more interested in themselves than serving the masses.
Of course, the other way is to focus your campaign in a constituency issue - there is a current independent MP who got elected doing just this, rather than taking a 'scatter-gun' approach that just scatters any support such as just complaining that the whole political system is broke (which of course it's not as we live in a democracy where people have a free and fair ballot).
It basically comes down to commitment, if you really believe, you will do what it takes, you will make the sacrifices...
Complain about this comment
Sutara @ 183
I hope that nothing I write on these BBC blogs can be interpreted as a 'demand' because that is not my intention at all.
I do like to make suggestions though, so for example, if enough English people really think about their precious General Election vote and use it accordingly, then it is possible that we could see an English Parliament run by most English representatives fairly soon.
After all, if we look to the Scottish example, they, through intelligent voting, are now in more-or-less control of their own country so there is no reason why we English cannot eventually get to the same place, politically speaking.
The Scots have the SNP and no doubt other parties will come into being in Scotland once full independence is achieved, to challenge the SNP, and we English have the English Democrats; the Jury Team and others who would work politically for English people.
I suggest that we English should heavily punish the three mainstream parties at the next General Election for what we see as blatant abuses, within 'the rules' or not.
Futhermore we have politicians via their proxy HMRC on our backs the whole time, extracting their 'due' and our noses have really been rubbed in it by the priviledged treatment that HMRC appear to have granted many of these Westminster MP's so it a form of 'natural justice' for most of these MP's to get their come-uppance from their 'customers', that is, us.
The General Election may be be up to a year away so we must be patient but they do say that revenge is a dish best eaten cold.
Complain about this comment
For a wonderful week or two the contributors were united almost as one.
Now its lots of yah boo sucks and my gang is better than your gang.
Oh for another expenses type revelation.
Complain about this comment
Believing that they're all a just a crowd of second-rate chancers I have no axe to grind one way or the other, but I thought that the speaker did ok. He's a performer, but so are most politicians and it's not necessarily a bad thing. He seemed to manage to take control. So although I wouldn't have voted for him he'll do for me for now.
I think (and hope others agree) that it would sometimes make things clearer if people quoted others by using italics. If you want to and don't know how, enclose an 'i' between a pointy 'less than' sign and a pointy 'greater than' sign (as though they were brackets) at the start of the text you want to italicise and at the end enclose '/i'. Hope some find that helpful.
Complain about this comment
AndyC555 at 187
The government wrecked the public finances
Totally correct.
And here is an interesting interactive link to show you how:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8278a416-5f74-11de-93d1-00144feabdc0,dwp_uuid=e70ca99e-a4b0-11db-b0ef-0000779e2340.html
In case you can't be bothered to read it Gordon Brown increased public spending by 41% in ten years vs a 13% increase the prior ten years under the tories.
He added 29% extra NHS staff over ten years... sorry did the population go up by that much or is it the case that every time you turn up at your GPs or a hospital there are always people dillying around doing nothing?
And he pushed the education budget up from 50 to 80bn yet we now have exam results that universities won't recognise because they are not worht the paper thet are written on; the children's secretary incapable of accepting any responsibility or the bungled exam results; SATS being abondoned because they are harming our children's development; an ex poet laureate saying that the extract teaching is damaging creativity.
Just how much money does this government need to waste to recognise it is consistently and continually getting it wrong?
Call an election; newlabour has only 5% national support and no mandate.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS