Who took away Martin's chair?

Forlornehope

Cameron has to balance being seen as radical and being seen as, to borrow from our US cousins, Prime Ministerial. A certain restraint in this situation carries more conviction than going for the jugular. After yesterday it was clear that Martin was going; it was, arguably, better for Cameron to remain dignified than to put the boot in.

Ted

Nick Clegg has been silent on Lord Rennard accusations, hasn't acted decisively on his MPs who made claims outside the spirit (possibly because of his own claims - paying back overseas phone calls while trousering the rest). As todays ICM poll reported he hasn't impressed the public.

Clegg knows he's not going to be in power so can act as a pressure group acts, Cameron doesn't have that freedom.

BU

Here's a thought. If MPs were to be required to give back capital gains on property to the taxpayer, would that not reduce the incentive to maximise profit on the sale of that house? Could they choose to sell it at a non-competitive rate and perhaps let a friend or relative know that they were doing so?

Or is that just too cynical?

Hugh

I have just viewed OBD giving a principled Party political broadcast via Cranmer. He is acquiring gravitas and Statemanship. As he is likely to be in charge of pulling us all out of the "Brownstuff" soon, this is key to the future.
Competing with Clegg on 24 hour news would be unwise.
Well done OBD.

Ed

James, I don't think it's in any way fair to give Brown any kudos for telling Martin he had to go, and I don't believe anybody will give it to him. In reality, Brown needs this like he needs a hole in the head. The inevitable bi-election will be painful and humiliating. And there's every chance that Brown's mates in the Scottish mafia won't forgive him for disowning one of their own.

No, Brown went for the 'least bad' option - the alternative being, well, unthinkable; ending up hugely isolated on the issue, and lending weight to Cameron's call for a general election.

So, I suppose some credit for Brown for making the correct decision when asked to choose between a hole in the head or a bullet in the throat...

Stepney

You're wrong. This is tabloid thinking.

If DC set a precedent as leader of HM Opposition in calling for the speaker's head then we'd open the doors for future oppositions to do the same thing whenever they didn't like the manner of the speaker.

The PM and the leader of the Opposition cannot and should not take on the referee. It would result in utter chaos.

He was right not to do so and to let momentum take it's course.

This is the House of Commons not a youth club disco committee.

mckenzie

At the end of the day James its not a game like you say. Cameron is getting good advice I feel, and 'know thine enemy' seems to be the order of the day here as well as 'don't hate your enemy because it clouds judgment'.

The PM is the man presiding over this mess, and like you say, saying nasty things about the speaker has been taboo until now...so let the PM and his sordid bunch be the ones to sully history.

Not taking away from Clegg for speaking out when it clearly needed to be done, but it was done and that was enough, there was nothing to be gained from adding anything to it. Its a very shameful mess which traces its way back to source quite clearly. Real leadership is about delegation and motivation; let the vandals feel the shame and not come out smelling of roses instead of shit.

Jock

I'm not sure if you are right about Cameron and the Speaker, Fraser.

I judge that there will be something of a sympathy backlash for Martin when he quits. Many people see him as a cross between a handy scapegoat for discredited MPs and a hapless, partisan tool of the Brown and the Labour hierarchy who voted him in to suit their own purposes and cast him adrift when he went from useful tool to am embarrassment.

I suspect that even those think he is not up to the job will feel his treatment has verged on the indecent. Maybe Cameron has played it right.

CS

This one of those Westminster Village things. Most of the people I know are saying today that they've no particular sympathy for the Speaker but that they think he's being used as a scapegoat to cover MPs' arses. A change of Speaker is not going to impress many people. So Cameron calling for the Speaker's head wouldn't really have won him much kudos in the country for what many see anyway as little more than a rearranging of the proverbial deckchairs. A change of Prime Minister though - the country can understand that.

Forlornehope

The problem with insisting that MPs hand back any profit is that it would only be equitable if they could claim to cover a loss. We all feel like kicking the bastards at the moment but that is not a sensible way to make rules. This proposal actually has not been thought through properly; fairly typical of the LibDems in fact.

It would probably be better to put a stop to mortgage interest payments altogether. MPs could then either rent or charge hotel accommodation, with a maximum overnight rate. It is possible for companies to negotiate quite reasonable discounts with very comfortable central London hotels that would come to much less than MPs are charging.

Simon

only you could turn Martin's demise into another one of your rants about Cameron

TGF UKIP

Chances are it was Gordon who got Martin to go with a deal of Martin's seat to Martin's son, a peerage and the promise of quangos to come.

Gordon will then be able to marshall his tribe to vote in another but much younger version of Martin who will be there for decades.

The Tories have been plain daft to force Martin out while there is such a decisive Labour majority. Bet Gordon can't believe his luck.

And as to why Dave hasn't been calling for Martin's head, it's simple. Dave just doesn't do bold without his focus groups and Dave certainly doesn't do anti establishment.

You're forgetting just who and what Dave is, Fraser.

PS And Martin won't go with good grace. Expect a speech starting "Following the attacks on the chair yesterday" and continuing in similar vein to loud approval from the Labour benches. The tenor of the battle over the election of the next Speaker will be established this afternoon and it certainly won't be pleasant or reflect well on Parliament.

Jeremy

"Cameron needs to be seen as the major reformer, and IMHO he missed a trick in calling for a general election rather than for the Speaker's head."

Again, in fairnes to Dave, he has called for a General Election. I saw and heard him do so on yesterday's six-o-clock news, at one of those "Connect with Cameron" events. But you know as well as I do, James, that Brown will play for as much time as he can possibly get. Because for him to go to the polls now would mean electoral suicide for the Labour Party. He will try to avoid both by-elections and a General Election until next year, if he possibly can. And there may even be a further change in Labour leadership, possibly over the summer, without a General election being called (if they can get away with it).

"I agree with the LibDem proposal that all capital gains on property bought with mortgages funded by the taxpayer should be returned to the taxpayer."

Yes, that is true. And most particularly so in the case of the Chancellor of The Exchequer. I dare say that all of these issues will be thrashed out between Cameron and Clegg and the other party leader over the coming days and weeks.

"But Cameron badly needs to present the Tories as a radical, purifying force..."

To be fair to Dave (I'm being very fair to Dave^^)he was the first to grasp the magnitude of this crisis, the first to articulate that in public and the first to realise that at the heart of this crisis there lies the opportunity for improvement and change. But let us not be panicked into taking rushed measures or conned (by parliament, in the form of its various committees) into taking the kind of half measures which leave nobody satisfied and the potential for future dodgy financial practices intact.

On a seperate note, I happen to like the wigs, the clothes, the ceremonial, the statues and the architecture - the pomp and the circumstance associated with parliament. It all adds colour to our national life. And there is no principle of which I am aware which states that because a man is not wearing a ceremonial wig he is therefore inherently more honourable and honest than one who is. One ought not to confuse the form of the thing with its substance.

Ian Walker

Not sure about "outflanked". Clegg's merely being a decent Lib Dem leader for once, rather than the anonymous nobody he's mostly managed so far. They've always had the luxury of bluffing with the radical card, knowing full well they'll never have to play it for real.

And, with the New Labour experiment nearly finished, I'd prefer Cameron to BE a major reformer, rather than just be seen as one. We've got 12 years of "the Ratchet" to undo again, and we probably won't get 18 years to do it this time.

As for the property issue, why not repay any capital which the member has personally put in, and sieze the house to be used as accommodation for future MPs, or sold off in better times. Turn a problem into an investment for the country.

viewer

It would be quite wrong for Cameron to have openly attacked the Speaker. Part of the problem was the party politics behind Martin's election as Speaker. If Cameron had gone public it would have reinforced the parrty politics issue. The whole point is that this should not be party political.

viewer

It would be quite wrong for Cameron to have openly attacked the Speaker. Part of the problem was the party politics behind Martin's election as Speaker. If Cameron had gone public it would have reinforced the parrty politics issue. The whole point is that this should not be party political.

viewer

It would be quite wrong for Cameron to have openly attacked the Speaker. Part of the problem was the party politics behind Martin's election as Speaker. If Cameron had gone public it would have reinforced the parrty politics issue. The whole point is that this should not be party political.

Tiberius

Fraser, if CGT has been paid on a property funded by the taxpayer, I would agree that the rest of the profit should be returned to the taxpayer too.

In no CGT has been paid and should have been, then we are into tax evasion, which is a different ball game.

But there will be some transactions (Michael Gove's, perhaps) which are bona fide.

Also, as has been mentioned previously, should the taxpayer stump up where a capital loss occurs?

Sir Graphus

Technically, it was Gordon who did for Martin. Martin's only hope was for Gordon to order the whips to ensure a no confidence motion failed. Gordon hasn't done this.

No credit to Gordon, though. If Gordon hadn't been in such a politically weak position, he could & would have saved Martin. He'd dearly love to have done, but cannot; that's how weak Gordon's position is. He can barely hang on to his own job. He has to ditch Jacqui next.

Denis Cooper

If Cameron wanted the Tories to be a radical, purifying force, then he would announce that in the future every Tory MP would always be free to vote according to his conscience, in accordance to his duty to the country as a whole, and his special duty to his constituents.

Now that would be radical, and purifying.

Liz Brown

Cameron has played this well - he now cannot be charged with playing party politics. Clegg was awful on Newsnight - he refuded to answer, when repeatedly asked by Paxman if he would support Cameron's calls for a General Election. Surely Parliament cannot be restructured whilst the old guard is temporarily in place (13 months at most now). Incidentally, I doubt that gormless stuck the knife in - that means that he would have had to break with the habit of a lifetime and actually make a decision.........

DW

Cameron is Leader of the Opposition and Clegg is not. Hence Clegg has more manoeuvre room to get involved in getting rid of the Speaker. Cameron cannot be seen to be 'leading' the opposition against the Speaker for all the reasons others have given.

Verity

Simon addresses Fraser: "only you could turn Martin's demise into another ... rant(s) about Cameron."

Not while I'm alive.

As to Cameron, he is a timid man. He is not a leader.

The new Speaker must be a Tory. If they put in a third socialist in a row, it will diminish respect for the office.

Mr. K.

In all honesty, the suggestion that it would have been wrong for Cameron to call for the speakers' resignation simply would not have been seen as a political move. When there is justification, as there clearly was here, it would only have been seen as doing the right thing. In many ways Cameron should have done this with brown; calling for a dissolution of parliament/resignation of the Prime Minster at every opportunity he gets has really diminished the impact of such a suggestion in the public debate.

Clegg should be congratulated for doing this. It was neither radical or inappropriate; parliamentary conventions may be the fundamental components of our constitution, but they exist to be reformed, questioned and broken when circumstances dictate them. It is true that he won't receive much good press for this given the current public mood, but it is a powerful and necessary first step in allowing parliament itself to sort this mess out; rather than have the public take part in a general election that would be dangerously single-issued and liable to give the fringe parties a shot at a seat in Westminster.

TGF UKIP

Fraser, Tiberius' mention of your special friend Gove reminds me of a puzzling excerpt from the Humphrys/Dave interview this morning.

In the discussion about expenses, Speaker etc Humphrys said to Dave "Michael Gove has already told you that his constituency party wants him to go."

Just who was Humphrys referring to as "him", Gove or Martin?

If it was Gove that really should be headline news, particularly for the Speccie.

Vulture

All this sentimental codswallop abt not breaking conventions and being seen to undermine the Speaker is arrant bollox. Fact: (as David Brent would say) Martin has been a purple-faced buffoon and a total disaster from Day 1. His presence at Troughminster has polluted public life and he's been kicked out only when its far, far too late.

Fact 2: Dave missed a political trick by his jelly-bellied dithering. And for the second time this month he let Clegg steal a march on him. Par for his usual poor course, I fear.

The man I feel sorry for is Quentin Letts of the Mail. He's been kicking old Gorbals around for so many years he won't know what to write abt now.

And if Liebour do put up Paul Martin in his pa's old seat they will have committed suicide for real. Don't they remember what happened in Crewe with Dunwoody's daughter? BtW: why do all these posters call you James, Fraser?

Andrew

One wonders how Labour's comfort-eating Chief Whip feels about the Prime Minister laying down his friend for his poltical life.

Bill Harlington

Absolutely right Fraser. Cameron made the wrong call. It was patently obvious the speaker had to go.

Its also obvious that the public want RADICAL reform. I just hope DC picks up on that on time.

greg

Fraser, you're supposed to be an intelligent chap, surely you can engage a few brain cells to realise that Clegg's proposals are a complete nonsense. If you don't want MPs making capital gains on second homes then the ONLY solution is to remove mortgage payments from the second home allowance.

Reasons (among many):

- If the MP can't make a capital gain, then the taxpayer must bear capital losses.

- What happens if the MP owned the house before he started receiving mortgage interest payments?

- what if the taxpayer funded allowance is only funding a proportion of the mortgage interest costs?

- how do you account for MPs making capital improvements out of their own funds? etc etc

ChrisD

"Cameron needs to be seen as the major reformer, and IMHO he missed a trick in calling for a general election rather than for the Speaker's head. And if it was Gordon Brown who called for the Speaker to go, then it will give our beleaguered PM a little bit of kudos"

Fraser, you are wrong on this.

While the Coffee House team wonder about Clegg and Cable stealing the march on Cameron over the issue of the Speaker and constitutional reform. They should maybe have sat and listened to Cameron’s one hour slot on 5 Live taking calls from real voters.

Cameron gets it, and while they, and other politicians sit discussing the merits of constitutional or expenses reform today, and before we have chosen a new Speaker or had the Kelly review published. Cameron is calling for a GE.

MP’s were yesterday demanding the right to debate and vote on the future of the Speaker, Cameron gets the fact that the voters would like a debate and vote on these issues as well. They have a right to decide who makes these momentous decisions about their future on their behalf.

And if the Speaker had to go because he was regarded as part of the problem, and a road block to reform. How about the voters getting to decide who they have represent them on the exactly the same basis.

TrevorsDen

Think you are talking gibberish Mr Nelson. Cameron has effectively given the green light to associations to interview and deselect MPs. The LibDems are still in possession of stolen money donated to them by a con-man.

Greg makes good points. In my view Cameron was right not to demand speakers resignation. He is right to put emphasis on an election.

Tiberius

"All this sentimental codswallop abt not breaking conventions..."

It's not sentiment, my friend, but a hard-headed recognition of the law of unintended consequences, a law which New Labour has continually flounced with disastrous results in such areas as changes to the Lords, and the dumping of the inherited systems of financial regulation.

Some might consider it rather clever of Cameron to be watching Martin leave office without him having to get his hands dirty.

Verity

Liz Brown writes, inexplicably, "Cameron has played this well - he now cannot be charged with playing party politics."

And someone who's asleep cannot be charged with being awake. Big deal.

Vulture's on form, though. Further to his point, I don't think voters like being taken for granted, a la the cited Dunwoody. "Lord" Gould's porky 22-year old daughter Georgina, parachuted into a pocket borough over a hundred miles from where she lives, lost her bid to become their representative in Parliament. I think the voters don't like to feel that someone else owns their votes.

David Cowell

Enough already. DC should not have been drawn in to this at all if he wants to appear a statesman. Nor should he wish for a general election, even if he is just sabre-rattling. Wrong time-wrong issue.

oldtimer

I thought I had posted this earlier, but it did not appear - lost in the Spectator rubbish bi?......

I believe you are wrong to criticise Cameron for not attacking the Speaker.It is a matter for MPs as a body to decide the election, and fate if need be as now, of the Speaker not a party political leader.

You also say:
" But Cameron badly needs to present the Tories as a radical, purifying force."
I thought Cameron has already called for fewer MPs, the end of the communications allowance and the end of the present over generous MPs pensions scheme - much to the chagrin of his own backbenchers - as steps towards a reduction in the cost of politics. These seem eminently sensible measures to me which deserve support not denigration.

Andy

"Cameron needs to be seen as the major reformer"

I'd have said it would be better all round if he actually WAS a reformer, rather than playing at being one as you seem to recommend.

As so often these days, the Lib Dems do the right thing effortlessly while Cameron huffs and puffs and gets it nearly right... but still wrong.

Publius

Andy. I don't see the LibDems doing "the right thing effortlessly" on Europe. But perhaps you do.

Tiberius

Verity's predilection for using adjectives meaning "not slim" when discussing other women continues...

hadrian

I suspect that if it turns out Broon had a major role in ousting Martin it still won't be perceived to his advantage. He procrastinated once again like the Prince of Denmark and only reacted when he realised the full force of public revulsion over this. He did it against instinct, kicking and screaming and no amount of pouring on the best gloss after the event will make it any less sticky for himself.That there is going to be a by-election raises the question- is this Martin's parting revenge on his erstwhile protector? The very last thing Gordo must want is a series of by-elections further undermining his government's continuing legitimacy.