The Speaker passes the buck

Worried of Windsor

The Speaker and Sergeant's actions make more sense if seen as part of a longer-term investigation process with which they had been involved beforehand. An existing 'working relationship' that led to an informal decision-making process.

Do we know who authorises phone tapping in Westminster?

John

A totally hopeless performance.

GJTory

Just listening to Cameron in Parliament. great speech

dilys

So Pay tells Mick that an MP may be arrested and he isn't interested to ask who? Yeah, right.
I'd bet he did ask, and was told, and when he discovered it was a Tory he thought his day was made.

Christian Gowers

When he says he wasn't informed that there wasn't a warrant he is admitting that he was neglectful in his role, it's not up to the Police or the Sergeant at Arms to tell him everything, it's up to him to make sure he finds out.

But then again, Martin is a trade unionist, and when has one of those ever thought of anything but their own position?

TrevorsDen

As I asked the other day where's the Warrant?

The speaker knew something was afoot the day before. WHY did he not ask to be kept informed? Why did he do nothing (it would seem) to be kept aprisd oif what might happen.

The Sargent at Arms is utter and complete burnt toast - but it is incredible that the Speaker did not think to ask any number of plausible questions and it is quite unbelievable the S of A simply lay back and thought of England.

Wilhelm

Doesnt Glaswegian, Gorbals Mick look dinky in his frilly frock.

Worried of Windsor (again)

And another thing, what is this "consent form"? Do they really have ready-printed forms for authorising police searches in lieu of a warrant?

Still one advantage of such a form is that you can always fill it out after the event. Which could be quite convenient.

Roger Davies

Not his finest hour. Makes one ashamed of being British. What a disgraceful bunch of self serving turds.

George Laird

Dear All

I, for one never had the slightest doubt that Michael Martin would be staying.

Never!

In order to resign, you have to have principles and anyone who has watched Michael Martin over the years would easily, easily tell that the lure of the Speaker’s salary comes first.

In Scotland Martin “represents” the area of Springburn, his son Paul Martin is an MSP.

Paul Martin so thick, he reinforces the belief that anyone can stand for a political position.

Martin and his son are sometimes known as the “Springburn Mafia” have sown up the entire area.

Also, let us not forget Martin’s wife, Mary, was also on his constituency payroll, earning £25,000 a year for unspecified duties, even though she was living in London with her husband.

I wonder what her “unspecified duties” were?

Enjoying herself?

So, having exhausted all the possibilities, someone had to take the rap, enter Jill Pay, hear no evil, see no evil, do no evil and of course ask no questions and understand no rules.

She is the lamb for slaughter; she is the sandbag to be pulled in front of Michael Martin when the lead starts flying.

But, the lead has to start flying, Martin has to go, there is simply is no other option.

A motion of no confidence must be organised cross party, with the except of Labour, I think Brown will three line whip the party to keep his stooge in the Speaker’s chair.

Why was the rules not followed, easily explained, it would have stopped the search and breach of Parliamentary privilege and those involved certainly didn’t want that.

Finally, why does Martin have to go, because he was warned in advance and stood by and done nothing!

He has shown himself unworthy of trust.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Simon C

It is my understanding that the position and responsibilities of the Sergeant-at-arms were scaled back at the time of Jill Pay’s appointment. So far as I understand matters, she is responsible for the security of the Commons’ chamber only. If that is correct, what right did she have to give permission for the searching of Damien Green’s parliamentary rooms? Surely, that was a matter for which only the Speaker could give permission?

oldtimer

Watched it live and also Cameron and some Brown in the debate on the Queen`s speech.

Re the Speaker`s statement I found the absence of a search warrant truly shocking. The apparent ignorance of the Sergeant at Arms of the need for one even more shocking. The Speaker`s behaviour thoughout this episode appears feeble in the extreme - clearly he is not up to the demands of the position he holds. There was also a notable silence about the role of the Clerk of the House in all this. I wonder why?

In a post last Friday I commented "It has the odour of a dirty tricks operation to discredit the Conservatives. If it is, it will backfire spectacularly."

I still think it smells. There are more stones to be turned to reveal what lies beneath. Tomorrow`s statement by the Home Secretary and the Conservative reply should be worth watching. I recall that Dominic Grieve MP, the shadow Home Secretary, once won the Parliamentarian of the Year award from the Spectator mainly, I believe, for his decimation of another Labour Home Secretary. It will be interesting to see if he lives up to this reputation tomorrow.

Re Cameron, I thought he was excellent. Brown was feeble when challenged about search warrants via several interventions.

mac

The reason for replacing Major General Peterkin with a tyro, pliant SAA is increasingly clear. Who actually gives Martin the Party's orders: Byrne, Harman or Brown N?

No wonder Labour is so sensitive to jibes about Stalinist practice.

Jim

Cameron was outstanding. Brown was simply embarrassing.

Condescender

What a poser for your commentators: what bothers you most, the Thick Mick from the Gorbals (oh, near enough) or the upgraded office keeper (female forsooth)? Which to patronise, don't ask me to choose?

Michael

Surely this is a typical Brown operation. And like all his little schemes it has blown up in his face.

Canon Alberic

I thought Cameron was outstanding as well. Brown looked like he'd been taken out of his straightjacket, forced into someone else's Ede and Ravenscroft suit, and given some random notes from Treasury.

You Mr Nelson did not make such forceful points on Sky News. Whys that? Do you have different opinions for different media?

Bocephus

Of track, but Harperson has just said the government are introducing this new mortgage repossession scheme because "if people are worried their home might be at risk it makes them feel unlike spending anything." So we cover the mortgage so they can continue buying tat from Primark and plasma TV's.

Makes you proud to be British.

Bocephus

Old Timer

I think you give the Speaker to little credit I believe he did exactly what was expected of him last week. Do you believe he would be so lacking in curiosity if he had known it was a Labour MP?

Your second point is correct this is dirty tricks gone spectacularly wrong. I believe the Government thought the press would take the line Mandelson has been pushing today. When they didn't and some of their backbenchers began to worry it could be they who are nicked in a few years they all started passing the buck.

Chingford Man

Many thanks to Fraser for his dissection of his fellow Glaswegian. Martin's response is shocking. His defence seems to be "I did nothing wrong as I'm just a chump." This man is so unfir for the job, it beggars belief.

The only consolation is that plenty of people will come out of this affair covered in s***, which will be justice of a sort.

Can't wait to read Quentin Letts disembowelling the old booby tomorrow.

Steve

Oh come on, does anyone believe any of this, we are expected to believe:

A; It doesn't occur to the Serjeant at Arms to have a word The Speaker about the planned police action.
B; it doesn't occur to David Normington to have a word with Jacqui Smith about the planned police action.
C; It doesn't occur to Gus O'Donell to have a word with Gordon Brown about the planned police action.

I can just about accept that it might have slipped the mind of one of them. But all 3?

Henry Rogers

I had a dream last night that I was walking past Tower Hill underground station. There were workmen building some sort of wooden platform nearby, with steps leading up to it. And then I woke up.

Ken

@ Condescender 5:36pm
Answer: Both. Two equally putrid labour eruptions. Out and no pensions.

TGF UKIP

Simon C raises a very interesting point. If he is correct then the S of A was in no position to give consent to the police, Martin would/should have known that and been aware that any police activity outside the Chamber were a matter for him alone.

What was apparent today was how precious Labour feel Martin is to them and how fiercely they are determined to hang on to him despite the daily debasing of the Office of Speaker.

The matter which didn't raise its head at all today appears to me to be the most damaging of all to the police. That is the reports that they told they told the S of A that the Director of Public Prosecutions had been consulted - he hadn't. If the S of A was informed to the contrary that is plain and simple misrepresentation and Coffee House lawyers will be able to advise whether the police officers concerned can be prosecuted.

Mick

It's fairly plain. The Speaker should go and the Opposition should have forced the government's hand. The question I'm left mulling over is why didn't they?

http://tinyurl.com/579s5h

carol42

This performance was utterly pathetic, never lifted his eyes from the statement prepared for him, even to the point of saying "order" when no one was making a sound! did they write that in too. He is so thick he didn't even realise it. There are no words to describe what I feel about this disgrace of a government I would literally vote for anyone to get rid of them such is my loathing for them and Brown and Mandy in particular.

Andy Leeds

As Melaine Philips points out why did the Police say they had obtained 4 Search Warrants when they had only 3 ? So was the 4th refused ? And why did they obtain warrants for the other premises and not for the MPs office in the Palace ?

This whole thing stinks and Speaker Martin's statement was a disgrace. At the very least the Sergeant at Arms must resign.

hadrian

As 'explanations' go this was about as informative as sex education in the Fifties.
Martin is in this high office only by New Labour's contempt for well grounded convention that dictated it should have currently been occupied by a Tory. That being the case one'd have thought he'd have been as meticulous in the role as possible, instead of which he's as useless a lump as ever sat there.
Little wonder we read in the Telegraph today that Her Majesty has never given public endorsement of the current Sarjeant-at-Arms, considering she's one on Martin's own stooges and appointed without so much as a courtesy by-your-leave to the Palace.
Seeing the Monarch in the Upper House in her resplendent finery one is vividly reminded of the solemn responsibilities of power and just how personal possession of it needs to be hedged in by those seemingly arcane ceremonies of State. At least in the Queen we have one public figure fully deserving our affection and fealty.
Considering the profoundly disturbing constitutional implications of this episode I was a shade surprised at how relatively 'subdued' the Commons were, despite some good outbursts of indignation and a very small number of reasoned arguments.

Tankus

I'm amazed the speaker didnt bame it on the Americans

Susan Hill

A look at the pic of him in full fig tells you exactly why he isn`t the type to go. Like all the ex-working class lefties he absolutely ADORES dressing up and being important. I mean, just look at that pose. Gilbert and Sullivan couldn`t have made it up.

Wilhelm

Condescender

All I want is a man with 2 brain cells who can speak English.

Im not asking for bleeeeding James Mason.

Thick Mick doesnt fit the bill. Thems the facts.

Jim Scott

Why should anyone be surprised at Martin's performance? He must be one of the most ineffectual Speakers for many years and, to make matters worse, remains blatantly partisan. He will hang on like grim death rather than forsake his salary, pension and Grace & Favour residence - the man has long forgotten his roots and is a disgrace to the historic position which he holds.

dopey

If this had happened to his gaffe in Gorbals he would be behind his portculis screaming for the polis to show their 'W', while Lady M was ready to flush the goodies away. If he does go, its for health reasons. A sore back, carrying his wedge home.
Gotta say fair play tho, so inarticulate and getting so far.
Prescott fer speaker ha

dopey

If this had happened to his gaffe in Gorbals he would be behind his portculis screaming for the polis to show their 'W', while Lady M was ready to flush the goodies away. If he does go, its for health reasons. A sore back, carrying his wedge home.
Gotta say fair play tho, so inarticulate and getting so far.
Prescott fer speaker ha

Ray

PLease Please Please lets have an independant Scotland. Then we will never have a Labour government again.

RODEST

Fraser, I have to say on this one your expectaions are too high, Martin realy is telling the truth when he says he does not know anything. Thats why they put his name on his office door.

Expecting Martin to do the right thing is akin to expecting miracles and the imposible on the same day.

Did you notice? Martin was missing for four days and the prince of darkness had a tale to tell; its the first time the ventriloquist and his dummy have been so far apart.

In addition to your views on the point made 'Parliamentary privilege has never prevented the operation of criminal law', but Blair and Brown have managed to over the past eleven years.

BrianSJ

So it is a police state. I didn't hear Cameron's speech but assuming the report above is accurate, then MPs were pretty pathetic.

justintime

I must applaud Canon Alberic's Gordon/Ede and Ravenscroft reference.

Has anyone else noticed the peculiar comment from Nick Robinson repeating the silly references to Cameron's likely attitude to leaks as PM?

(By the way, I don't subscribe to the Robinson is biased camp.

Much too second rate to do a decent job, yes. Biased, no.)

Wilhelm

Gorbals Mick looks like Rab C Nesbit.

IanW

Judging by the difficulty Martin had in reading his script, I doubt he had much of a hand in writing it. It would be interesting to have an informed analysis of how closely it matches his usual style.

Dixon

I watched Martin reading his prepared statement...it would have been hilarious if it had not been so shocking...like a seven-year old reading aloud in class. Fumbling, mis-timed, faltering, mis-reading, monotonously lacking in inflection. A child of seven could have done better. The man is clearly not good enough for such a grown-up job.

carol42

I agree with IanW, he sounded like a primary school pupil learning to read out loud for the first time. How did we come to this?

Jeremy

Fraser:

"...she should have known warrants anyway. An ex-soldier, as the Serjeant At Arms used to be, might have more of an excuse for not knowing this..."

Actually Fraser, soldiers tend to live and die by the regulations. You can be sure that any ex-soldier worth his salt (and serving as the Sergeant-at-Arms) would have known the procedures relating to warrants. And I know of one ex-soldier (rtd) in particular who - if the Old Bill had turned up without the right Doctor's Note - would have made them rue the day they ever set foot outside of their maternal wombs - believe you me.

Speaker Martin:

"I was told in the strictest confidence by her that a member might be arrested and charged, but not further details were given to me.”"

So it never occurred to him to incline his fat head and ask for further details, then? The Speaker's dissembling in this matter has covered him in... something less than glory.

FatBigot

The Speaker was correct but misleading in saying that Parliamentary privilege does not prevent the operation of criminal law. Criminal law has exceptions and Parliamentary privilege is an exception. No MP or member of the House of Lords can face criminal charges or civil action as a result of what he or she says in the chamber. Something which would be a crime if said outside the chamber is not a crime if said inside. Parliamentary privilege does not mean the member "gets away" with a crime, it means that what he or she has done is not a crime at all even though it would be in other circumstances.

The issue everyone seems to be dodging is whether a search warrant can be issued by a court for offices within the Parliamentary estate. I do not believe it can because Parliament is its own court and the areas of the Parliamentary estate given over to the work of Parliament are within the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament.

In any event, it is hard to see any judge or magistrate being silly enough to issue a warrant for the search of a Parliamentary office. They would say "take it up with the Speaker" because the constitutional issues involved are for Parliament to resolve.

And why, I wonder, when the request for permission to search was made to the Serjeant was it not referred to the Speaker immediately?

The whole scenario is bizarre from start to finish. Nothing the Speaker or Serjeant did seems to make any sense.

Michael Judd

Another point to quote the speaker,

".....as it is my responsibility,"

As The speaker admits, it is his responsibility. But he blamed subordinates.
In years gone by any failure of responsibility like this would be immediately followed by a resignation.

Where is the basic honor now?
Do Labour have any understanding of responsibility?

hadrian

The poor Sarjeant-at-Arms must be thinking..The age of chivalry is well and truly dead!!

William Campbell

Re Hadrian's comment. People are entitled to have their own views about Michael Martin, but shouldn't go around creating "long established conventions" that don't exist.

As a matter of chance, there has been an alternation of the party backgrounds of Speakers since the mid-60s - when the first ever Speaker with a Labour background was elected. However, with only one exception in living memory, Speakers have always been elected from the Government benches. The one exception was Betty Boothroyd, and her Tory opponent was a bit unusual too having just left the cabinet, defying the convention that the Speaker usually comes from the back-benches even if (s)he has had some governmental experience.

SIMON COWELL

so mick might try for a 3rd
term, does he think he's on
" THE X FACTOR " singing
" MICK THE KNIFE" maybe
" GO NOW " would be better
with friends like mick
who want enemies,nice to know
he stands by his staff.
and is so understanding
well MRS.PAY did not get an audience with the queen
and nor will MRS MARTIN
now, sorry you did not make the grade, or the palace