Field declares his interest in the Speaker's job

Susan Hill

Absolutely right. I do still think Field is needed as a thorn in the side backbencher but maybe he`d be a prominent thorn as Speaker. He also needs some voice coaching as he has a rather weak voice and you need to have strident tones to shut that lot up.

Rob C

Frank Field is a minority in his party in that he has the integrity to speak up when policies are clearly not in the public interest and this is what being an MP should be about. They are there to represent their constituency/electorate first and their party second - a fact which many MP's seem to have lost sight of. I think Frank has all the right qualities to make an excellent speaker and has shown above all that he can be impartial and put country above party. Given that the chance of the next government being Labour is pretty slim at best, I think most Labour MP's would see his appointment as a reminder to the public that not all of them are sleazy/devious and would therefore endorse his nomination.

Andy Leeds

Even though he is a Labour man I still think he would make an excellent Speaker. It is a toss up between him and Sir George Young. Of course you watch the massed ranks of Labour MPs who will run to vote for John Bercow.

Tim Hedges

I don't think Frank Field should be Speaker. His work on Welfare reform and pensions is too valuable to waste. I do agree he could produce a useful job description for Speaker but he should be left with the job of being Frank Field.

Forlornehope

This is another reason why having, at least part of, a second chamber randomly selected would be a good thing. There would be a relatively simple method for finding out what the public feel about any issue. Who knows, some of the more egregious gaffs of recent years, the poll tax, the Iraq war could have been avoided.

Andy Carpark

True: it is good to possess a stentorian voice when it is needed.

If Frank Field or Vince Cable became speaker the Chamber would be deprived of specialist knowledge which it can ill afford to lose. Precious few have the intellect or the dedication to master the economics of welfare in the detail that Frank Field has.

For this reason, I favour Ming Campbell, faute de mieux. And can they possibly try to avoid anyone even faintly louche (no names, no pack drill)?

Nicholas Hallam

Perversely, it may be that the Labour majority in the house will work to the benefit of the Tory contender John Bercow.

TrevorsDen

Perhaps the next Speaker after this should be elected by the public and not necessarily from those in Parliament.

Donald

Field appears to be of a genuinely independent mind, his career to date would seem to mark him as that.

A perfect qualification for the job.

Vulture

Asked this before but it didn't get posted: if Frankie is as straight, bright, saintly and clean as everyone says ( and I've no reason to doubt it) why is this paragon in the cesspit that is the Liebour party?

Michael Taylor

It also seemed to me that, knowing that Labour tribalists might block him, he was fishing for a 'draft Frank' internet campaign. I think it would be a good idea.

Mike, Brighton

I think Mr. Field wounld be an excellent reforming speaker but I can't help but think that his biggest contribuition may be as Minister for Welfare Reform under Cameron tasked to "think the unthinkable" but with no Brown to stop him

Mister Jabberwock

Frank Field as Speaker - over Brown's dead body!

Tory liars and moat pigs

The man's judgment is clearly unfit for he job surely? He shows loyalty to the political party which has presided of one of the most damaging periods government in British history for hundreds of years. How will someone like this help the situation?

kit salopian

There is a danger in this rush towards the uplands of political probity that we shall leave behind the benefits of the parliamentary system.

The essence of this lies in the readiness of the electors to accept that those who serve them in Parliament are competent and ready to REPRESENT them and act in their interests.

Take away that trust and the MPs bercomes a DElEGATES mandated to exercise each vote according the will of the lobby which ensured their election.

IS this not an absolute recipe for corruption? not the discoverable venality of today but hidden in perks and brown envelopes and the promise of rewards in the future.

Of course it'd be good to give people a greater voice in the way they are governed. But what proportion of the populace engage in it.

One only has to look at all the attempts at public consultation on issues which directly influence the lives of local people. Who attends these, who drives and influences the discussions? Almost inevitably it is small pressure groups, often led by individuals with an extreme agenda or populist politicians.

Now scale this scale this up to issues where serious money and vested interests become involved.. Imagine if you will the power which a multinationals which vested interests to manipiulate the public VOICE (no longer just OPINION).

And now imagine that voice being used to recall an MP who does not heed it, And imagine the rewards if the voice is heeded.

It can’t happen here? Think trade union sponsored MPs, think the House of Lords this week. Politics is not immune from the laws of quantuim physics –“it can happen it will”

If we want a democracy we have to trust the people we elect. Trust, like pregnancy is an absolute state. We cannot just trust them to do our bidding but not trust them to elect their own Speaker. We cannot trust them to call the government to account and yet expose them to vested interests.

Of course there is a need to clean up the expenses system. But that’s easy and will be done. Of course it’s necessary to introduce more checks and balances - let them be designed by an outside body – but we must trust the House to police them.

Errant MPs must go. Those who broke the law must be punished. Political leaders must be ruthless.

This whole sorry saga has presented Clegg with an opportunity to proselytise his agenda . But he is doing much more than that., he and those who think are stoking as fire which will destroy the fabric of democracy and leave the country tangled in a web of multinational interests, extremist pressure groups .

Danny Hedges

I agree with Tim Hedges. Cameron should get him to defect and think the unthinkable on welfare reform.

Denis Cooper

Andy Carpark

Menzies Campbell is a European federalist. That is to say, he wants the British government and Parliament to be constitutionally subordinated to federal European institutions.

How can such a person possibly be a suitable choice for the Speaker of the House of Commons? We need, above all, somebody who is totally committed to the supremacy of our national Parliament.

I would also offer a reminder about the specific issue of the Lisbon Treaty.

Campbell was re-elected in 2005 on a party and personal manifesto which included the promise of a national referendum - and in the case of the Liberal Democrats, especially, this was presented as a matter of high principle.

But when the rejected Constitution later re-surfaced, while Campbell was still party leader, he led the charge to renege on that manifesto promise - claiming that there shouldn't be the referendum he'd actually promised to support, but instead there should be a different referendum, an "in or out" referendum.

Likewise, just as I'd say that the new Speaker can't be a Liberal Democrat MP, because as far as I know they all want the British Parliament to be subjugated within a European federation, I'd say that the new Speaker can't be one of the SNP MPs either, because they want the British Parliament to cease to exist.

I have no particular animus against the SNP MPs - they're perfectly entitled to hold their views and argue their case, and at least they're honest and open about what they want, unlike the Liberal Democrats - but clearly it would be inappropriate to have a Speaker in the British Parliament who was not committed to the British Union.

oldtimer

I should like to see the agenda and hear from all the candidates on the hustings before commiting to a view on who should be speaker. Frank Field comes up with some interesting ideas in the body of his article but they need to be fleshed out.

It seems to me that whatever reforms are proposed it is a fundamental requirement that the speaker should be squeaky clean on expenses (Bercow as the No 1 expenses claimant needs close investigation), understands Commons procedures (and why they are there - like the rules of yacht racing they are complex but are the product of long experience, trial and error), and has the commanding physical presence (parade ground bark, beady eye) to command the attention of any unruly MP at 50 paces.

J Wright

If any candidate chosen by the thieving conspiracy that is par liament could be blocked by a half million petition of voters to HM the queen then this could stop thelabour whips producing another corrupt MrSpeaker. They will move heaven and earth to stop the democratic wishes of the people, especialy for F Field

Henry

if you support Frank for Speaker then join the Frank for Speaker facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=82663477038#/group.php?gid=82663477038&ref=mf

he's independent and not a Westminster insider. The only man able to make Parliament honest again

MartinW

Of course, the numbers say that Bercow could levered into place by the current dying government despite the opposition of the current Opposition. I think Bercow has to consider whether he would find the job comfortable when the likely majority party in a year's time does not support him. The Office could be made extremely difficult for him in many ways. He should also consider that if the Conservatives were to win an outright majority at the GE, then they would have the option to pass a no confidence motion on him as Speaker, and force him out. How would Bercow like to be the Speaker with by far the shortest period of office and forced out to boot?
He might consider the best course would be not to stand.

chris

I agree with Mike, Brighton. Frank is far to valuable to be 'sidelined' as Speaker. The Speaker needs to be non-political but firm on reform of the Parliament and the MPs, including the Government. Frank should be offered the job in a Conservative government to bring about reform in all the policy areas that he has been so eloquent about for the last 20 years.

Tiberius

Vulture: he can't go Tory and stay MP for Birkenhead. The dole queues wouldn't wear it.

I don't think Brown would want him as speaker. This is the man he had sacked for "thinking" (not part of Brown's 1984 Britain, I'll have you know), and the prospect of him asking Brown to give an answer to Cameron's questions would most certainly drive McStalin to a pre-emptive purge.

I didn't vote in the poll because no obvious candidate came to mind. The speaker should be a Tory after tradition (why fix something that's not broken), but Field would hopefully have the integrity to make sure New Labour's cheating and excess in the House was curtailed or even stamped out.

Verity

As Vulture asked above, if Frank Field is so wonderful, what is he doing voluntarily owning his allegiance to the foetid, foul, decadent Labour Party?

As someone else said, Mingus Campbell is an EU Federalist. He has no place of honour in the British Parliament.

For God's sake, let us stick with tradition and put in a real Conservative. John Redwood, quick witted, articulate, a right thinker, would be an outstanding Speaker.

Denis Cooper

Or Richard Shepherd, who speaks with the voice of a true, patriotic, democratic Parliamentarian.

David Bouvier

Frank is in the Labour party because he is a socialist.

Please don't assume that just because he is thoughtful and honest, and shares some concerns over the disabling consequences of welfarism that his overall value and goals are compatible with ours.

Denis Cooper

Or Richard Shepherd, who speaks with the voice of a true, patriotic, democratic Parliamentarian.

TGF UKIP

Denis Cooper, unfortunately Richard Shepherd doesn't have Field's talent for self promotion or his media nous.

Indeed, so hostile/indifferent to him are the media including the Tory media that he didn't even warrant a place in the Coffee House poll from which it could be reasonably inferred that Shepherd cannot be any great fan of The Heir.

Pete Hoskin

TGF: Be fair. I did actually address a comment to you on the poll post, explaining that the names on the poll were informed by suggestions from CoffeeHousers on an earlier post of mine. You were the only person to suggest Shepherd, and you did so once I'd already created the poll. I couldn't add him in subsequently, as the online poll feature is limited to ten voting options. I did, however, leave an 'Other' option, and encouraged CoffeeHousers to say who they had in mind if they voted 'Other'.

So rather than me being wired up to some Dave hotline, I was actually trying to make the poll representative of CoffeeHousers' views. Guess you can't please everyone.

TGF UKIP

Fair cop, Pete, I was going too far and your explanation was entirely rational so my inferrence was wrong and I apologize for tarring you with the Heirite brush on this occasion.

I note, however, other Coffee Housers are persuaded of Shepherd's virtues while I attribute Fields' polling success almsot entirely to his media omnipresence, not least on this website. Would be interesting to see the results of a name prompted poll including Shepherd (or is he of of another generation to most Coffee Housers?)

By the way, under this editorship I would keep very quiet about not "being wired up to some Dave hotline." We don't want to lose you.

Simon Icke

Yes Frank Field, Anne Widdicombe or Iain Duncan Smith so long as it's not John Bercow.