The One That Is Wishing Him Luck . . .

Sky News are reporting that Nigel Farrage is going to stand against John Bercow at the next General Election.

Bloody good luck to him. I hate this convention that no-one stands against an incumbent Speaker. Let's just assume that his constituents feel that he is a venal expenses thief who is only concerned with his own gravy and making it as easy as possible for all the other MPs to get their slice of the pie. I'm not suggesting that is the case, but if it were, is it fair that his constituents have the choice of Speaker and a selection of indie candidates?

Of course, I'd rather the indie candidate were elected, but in the real world you need a high profile to unseat a high profile. Let's hope Farage is high profile enough and this insulting convention gets kicked into touch.

The One That Is Really Underwhelmed. . .

So John Bercow is the new Speaker. You'll forgive me if I don't break out the bunting just yet, as it appears to me that the MPs have voted for someone who will look after them, rather than presiding over the changes that are so desperately needed.

Let's have a look at his record.

In 2004, while in Michael Howard's shadow cabinet, he wrote to wrote to Tony Blair praising the then prime minister's "outstanding statesmanship."

Hmmmm. Really? I always thought Blair's biggest fan on the Tory benches was David Cameron. Not a great way to endear yourself to the boss.

Last month, The Daily Telegraph disclosed that Mr Bercow “flipped” the designation of his second home between London and his constituency when he sold two houses in the space of a year, enabling him to avoid paying capital gains tax (CGT) on the profits from either sale.

Ahhh, so, that is why so many MPs voted for him, he really is one of them, isn't he?

He denied any wrongdoing but said he would pay £6,508 plus VAT to HM Revenue & Customs to cover the tax he could have been asked to pay on the sale of one of the homes.

So why pay them back? Come on man, have some courage in your convictions. If you've done nothing wrong then challenge them to take you to court. Paying cash out and then saying you're innocent just makes you look a bit of a tit.

And isn't the phrasing there lovely? Could have been asked? You can almost imagine a Revenue wonk in the style of Sgt. Wilson saying 'would you mind terribly paying some tax?' When was the last time the taxman asked? Demand is a more fitting word. And Could have asked? 'Well, we could ask you to pay it, but we've so much cash swilling about in here, we really don't see the need.' No, that seems unlikely to me.

The Tory MP for Buckingham also claimed almost £1,000 for the cost of hiring an accountant to fill in tax returns.

The Darling Manoeuvre. Tax need not be taxing. Just flip your house to avoid CGT and then get the proles to pay for your accountant to make it all pukka. Nice one.

So why the Tory dark faces last night? Are we to believe that they feel a trougher has derailed their plan to clean up the House? Can't be that. Cameroid could have scuppered Bercow's Speaker campaign in an instant by calling for a party investigation into his flipping.

Perhaps it is because whilst he is one of them, he isn't 'their' man. It's not fair, Labour have had a Speaker that did what he was told, why can't they have one?

Or is it that after the previous weeks of electoral disaster for Labour, the Tories are now unsure how to react when the person Labour wants to win an election actually goes and wins it?

Mr Bercow paid back £1,470.62 he claimed on his office expenses but it was not disclosed what the repayment was for.

But just as with everyone else, it was no doubt the result of a mistake. The only time you'll see a building holding so many people who have made so many mistakes is when you drive past the local prison. Those prisoners, in the main, will blame the system and poor choices. Although to be fair to the criminal class, some of them will admit that they done it and it was a fair cop. Not one MP has managed that yet.

Criminals - more honest than MPs.

The One That's Had An Idea. . .

This explanation of the voting procedure for the new Speaker today courtesy of Calling England:

9.30am: Michael Martin is no longer Speaker of the House. The Chair is immediately assumed by the Father of the House, currently Alan Williams, the Labour MP for Swansea West since 1964.

9.30-10.30: There is a one-hour window for nominations to be Speaker to be formally lodged with the clerks at the Table Office. Nominations must be in writing, and must consist of a signed statement of intent by the candidate, accompanied by not fewer than twelve and not more than fifteen signatures of other Members, of which at least three must be from a different party than their own. No Member can nominate more than one person.

11am: Lists of the candidates are placed in the lobby and published.

2pm: Each candidate is permitted to address the House. The order of speaking will be decided by lot (arranged by the Father of the House). After all the candidates have spoken, proceedings will move directly to the first ballot.
The presiding member (Alan Williams) will not be allowed to vote.

4pm: The first secret ballot takes place in the lobbies. Each member will be provided with a ballot paper with the list of candidates in alphabetical order. After half an hour the ballot will be declared closed.

4-5pm: Counting takes place by the Clerk of the House, and as soon as possible the results of the first ballot are announced to the House. If any candidate has received more than half the votes cast, the Presiding Member will put the question to the House that the member becomes the Speaker.

If no candidate has received more than half the votes, the candidate who received the fewest votes is removed, as well as any candidates who received less than 5% of the votes, and any candidates who have voluntarily withdrawn.

There is then a second ballot, and so on, until a candidate gets more than 50% of the House's support.

Dragging to the Chair: Once a candidate is agreed, they will immediately become the Speaker-Elect, and will be conventionally dragged to the Chair by their supporters.

The appointment needs to be approved by the Crown, through the commissioners in the Lords. If the Lords is still in business when a candidate is agreed, he or she can be confirmed straight away, and can ascend the Chair as Speaker.

Blimey, that’s a bit complicated, isn’t it? There must be a way to simplify matters. I’ve a cunning plan to ensure the strongest candidate gets in, a candidate that will lay down the law and that the rest of the House wouldn’t dare cross, it will also go a long way to ‘reconnecting’ Parliament with the electorate and would also make bloody good TV.

Erect a wrestling ring in the central lobby and gather all the MPs around it, perhaps a few of the Lords who haven’t fallen asleep on the red leather following a particularly gruelling liquid lunch could shuffle out as well. All the candidates, having been nominated by ten MPs of any political colour will then enter the ring.

Upon the chiming of the division bell, combat commences, no holds barred, foreign objects, such as the mace or despatch boxes, introduced to the ring by the watching MPs may be used with impunity. Candidates for Speaker are eliminated by being propelled over the top rope and having both feet touch the floor. Once eliminated, losing candidates must leave the lobby.

Once there is only one candidate left in the ring, he or she will be declared the winner. This procedure to be carried out annually, with the added bonus that the Speaker will have the opportunity, once a year, to challenge any MP of their choice to a loser leaves Parliament ‘Hell in a Cell’ cage match.

Watch the food allowance bills drop and the expenses claims for home multi-gyms skyrocket.

With the current candidates, under this scheme my money would be on Widders, I bet she fights really dirty.