Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Carswell Tables No Confidence Motion in Mr Speaker

This is the text of the motion being tabled in the names of Douglas Carswell, Paul Flynn, Gordon Prentice and Ben Wallace (among others), calling on the Speaker to step down...
"That this House has no confidence in Mr Speaker and calls for him to step down; notes that Mr Speaker has failed to provide leadership in matters relating to hon. Members' expenses; believes that a new Speaker urgently needs to be elected by secret ballot, free from manipulation by party Whips, under Standing Order No. 1B; and believes that a new Speaker should proceed to reform the House in such a way as to make it an effective legislature once again."

As I understand it, if it is a no confidence motion it has to be debated within 24 hours.


strapworld said...

I said before, Iain, Brown gave Martin his full support. I gave him until Friday. I stand by that.

He will make a statement to the house that he will stand down at the next general election.

They will not accept that!

Unknown said...

B R I L L I A N T.

Let's hope it works.

Obnoxio The Clown said...

I wonder if Kate Hoey will be signing?

Trend Shed said...

Frank Field as the new Speaker????

Now that Ming has let himself down with his soft furnishing habit............

P.S I'm assuming a Cameron government in 2010 and that democratic government requires an opposition politician as Speaker.

Fausty said...


There's something afoot at the BBC. Not only have they openly allowed people to slag off Brown, but they've also started talking about the Lisbon Treaty.

Winds of change. Yum.

Martin said...

The Speaker will call in the Scottish mafia to back him up.

Until we English do to him what we did to the coward William Wallace Parliament will be a joke.

Daniel1979 said...

Well Ming was being floated as an alternative a few weeks back - that won't happen now.

I think Doug Carswell would make a great speaker.

Unknown said...

I think we should just get down on our knees and pray.

This imbecile should never have been Speaker. He was wholly inappropriate from the start

Anonymous said...

Non non English elected MP should EVER be speaker of the House of Commons again, just as no MP elected outside of England should ever have any say whatsoever on English affairs!.

Scotland, Wales and N Ireland all have their own EU Regional Assemblies, which are hated in England, have no legitimacy and duly rejected, its time for an English Parliament as the only thing England gets out of the "Union" is the BILL....and a infestation of poisnonous Scottish communism.

Enough is enough!.


Tony said...

Iain - Pls point to the section of Erskine May I should turn to re your contention that this must be debated within 24 hours.

It's an EDM, right? So the only way this would normally be debated is if it was a)in the form of a prayer, b)tabled in the name of a party leader, and c) agreed via the usual channels.

Thatcher-right said...

For some reason I'm reminded of the Doc Morrissey in the original Reginald Perrin Series who mentioned, in passing, that he had been dismissed for "Gross medical malpractice or something minor like that".
(From memory - corrections will be gratefully accepted!)

Anonymous said...

I had the feeling that Labour would close ranks around Martin to protect him. After all, as evidenced by Brown's support today, the political blood of the left is thicker than decency.

That said, the motion cleverly makes the link to the expenses scandal and one has to ask if Labour's troughers really want to be seen to be associated with someone who has seemingly gone out of his way to deny transparency, (allegedly) had his own snout in the trough and who is now widely regarded as damaged goods.

Some on the left will of course support him - particularly those who still don't get it. Others, outraged by his conduct in the house won't. Those with a deep sense of preservation might just think that he is the sacrifice worth making to lance this boil (and one that might allow them to keep their cheque books firmly in their pockets).

Iain Dale said...

Tony, if it is an EDM it doesnt get debated. If it is a no confidence motion I am told it gets debated within 24 hours. Do your own reseacrh in Erskine May. I havent a clue. I said "I was told".

Tone made me claim it - he's a bad influence said...

Erskine May?
Norman St John Stevas is required.

Where is he now?

Anonymous said...

Can't see that it'd be an EDM: they've no substance. What Cameron does here will be really interesting - I see he's supportive of Martin so far.

Ricardo's Ghost said...

This is the first time that a No Confidence motion has been brought against a Speaker. It's very different from normal Confidence motions which are in the government. Hence, the convention is that the government immediately makes time in the Parliamentary schedule to defend itself against the Opposition's motion. It's not at all clear that the government is under the same obligation when the confidence in someone else is to be discussed and the motion wasn't brought by the Opposition frontbench.

@molesworth_1 said...

Interestingly, a currently hot 'twittertrend' is #rejectedmistermen.

Mr. Speaker #rejectedmistermen.

w.v. mingso. Honest.

Rob said...

Erskine May has:

"From time to time the Opposition put down a motion on the paper expressing lack of confidence in the Government - a ‘vote of censure’ as it is called. By established convention the Government always accedes to the demand from the Leader of the
Opposition to allot a day for the discussion of such a motion. In allotting a day for this purpose the Government is entitled to have regard to the exigencies of its own
business, but a reasonably early day is invariably found. This convention is founded on the recognised position of the Opposition as a potential Government, which guarantees the legitimacy of such an interruption of the normal course of business.
For its part, the Government has everything to gain by meeting such a direct challenge to its authority at the earliest possible moment."

Presumably this is the foundation of the claim that confidence motions are debated within 24 hours - although this is of course about the executive rather than the Speaker ... and so is possibly totally useless :)

The Grim Reaper said...

strapworld said "Brown gave Martin his full support. I gave him until Friday. I stand by that."

I do hope that Gorbals Mick has heard about Jonah's curse. Either way, he's utterly doomed.

Thats News said...

Review of the days Expensesgate sleazeSpeaker Martin should never have been put in this position. It must have been clear he could not handle the job before he was given it.

Anonymous said...

Whats all this secret ballot stuff all about?

Don't like the sound of that at all.

People may start to believe that trust, once TOTALLY lost/blown sky high, can be regained in such a sort amount of time, and with such lazy effort.

I don't trust politicians with ANYTHING especially anything secret, and even more especially, if they have a personal interest in the matter.

No, it would be much better if we had a leader of the house directly elected by the people, every two years.

MP's should be given a reasonably generous flat rate payed into a corporate account. This account should then be used and taxed in exactly the same way and under exactly the same rules and regulations, as any other small privately owned corporation.

Which is simple fare and no more open to corruption then any other small company. Which, thanks to Gordon Browns very real hatred for anyone involved in small companies, is not very open at all, if not more then closed.

Candidates for the post, would firstly be those MP's who wished to do the job. Then a system similar to that last used to elect Conservative leaders applied.

Our political class have to get the message that we simply do not trust them, or the people running the EU. We very likely will not never trust either of them again, with ANYTHING whatsoever.

Trust has been betrayed, taken to the cleaners, and flim-flammed into debt and/or welfare slavery.

Politicians act like a quick lick of watered down white emulsion is going to hide there systematic and institutionalized corruption.

Cameron may have gone further then the rest, but he has not even gone past the first furlong. Clegg had a heart attack shortly after leaving the trap, and Brown bust a blood vestal way back at the stable.

Note how not even Hamilton, Hains, or Blunket snitched on the other chaps in the establishments favorite corrupted House of Cards. Not even after they themselves were disciplined for relatively mirror or in Hamiltons case, very minor corruption.

They have all stuck together and so should be all equally ashamed of themselves and made to be publicly humiliated.

Criminal proceeding should be brought to almost all of them. As would happen to myself if I run my accounts with such criminal intent.

I am sure, sorry absolutely certain, that if I claimed to the Inland Revenue and customs that "It is OK, because all the other small business men are up to it." They would laugh at me all the way to court, and then into my prison cell.

Common law applies to every subject of the realm or it can not apply to any of them. Those that make the laws are not above the laws they introduce. In duty and in all common sense, they should apply to the law makers first and foremost.

Atlas shrugged

Mitch said...

Brown wont let the idiot speaker be replaced, he needs the help at PMQs without mad Mick he would have to actually answer a question or two.

edf said...

@thatcher-right "gross professional misconduct or something like that"

I didn't get where I am today by not recognising a classic quote when I see one ;o)

The atmos at PMQs today should be absolutely electric!!

He should never have got the job it was classic nulab abuse of a time honoured system that worked well. Whenever there's criticism he usually plays the class war card: see if he does this time.


David Boothroyd said...

No, there is no such requirement that such a motion put down by a backbench MP must be debated in 24 hours - or even debated at all.

So far as I can find the motion has not yet been tabled anyway. It would be more logical to appear as a motion with no day named for debate, ie a motion for debate on 'an early day', ie an Early Day Motion. Contrary to assertion, Early Day Motions can be allocated for debate.

Alternatively it could be put down for a named day. This would not mean it was actually selected for debate on that day because the selection of business is normally done by the Government who would prefer to debate something else.

If the Leader of the Opposition puts down a motion of no confidence then by convention the Government will provide time for it to be debated within a few days but there is no 24 hour requirement there either.

Disco Biscuit said...

Sorry Iain, it doesn't have to be debated. By convention a motion of no confidence in the Government tabled by the Opposition will be given time by the Government to be debated as soon as possible, and of course a Government confidence motion will be debated immediately.
This EDM is not an Opposition motion and doesn't express no confidence in the Government; it doesn't therefore have to be debated.

Siberian Tory said...

Martins appointment was classic New Labour. Appoint some old fashioned trade unionist types in to positions of nebulous authority. Speaker, deputy leader etc etc.

David Hughes said...

Don't hold your breath, Iain !

bloke in france said...

too long winded to work? meant that way?

"this house has lost confidence in Mr speaker" nuf said

Indigo said...

Why isn't Carswell's EDM here

Early Day Motions Signed By A MemberThe last one is 21 April.