Events | 2009.05.23
Martin's resignation is a symbolic first step in the cleansing of parliament | Vernon Bogdanor
MPs should ask only one question in choosing a new Speaker: which of us is best placed to muck out the Augean stables?
The news from Westminster yesterday was without precedent in modern British politics. It is more than 300 years since the British House of Commons removed its Speaker – in 1695 Sir John Trevor was ousted from parliament after accepting bribes from the City of London. Until recently, indeed, it was considered bad form to criticise the Speaker. In 1983, the two Alliance parties – the Liberals and SDP – dissatisfied with the amount of debating time they were given in the Commons, threatened to put down a motion of no confidence in the Speaker, Bernard Weatherill . He said that as soon as this appeared on the order paper he would resign. He could not, he insisted, continue once he had lost the support of an important segment of the House of Commons.
But today\'sresignation of Speaker Martin had become the necessary first symbolic step to cleanse parliament. After a week in which the clamour for his departure had grown steadily, he told the Commons today that he would vacate his office on June 21, "in order that unity can be maintained". It had become clear that nothing less would convince the nation that the problem of expenses is being addressed with the seriousness it deserves. It is not only that Martin has presided over the lax administration of the Fees Office, which regarded claims for piano tuners, moat cleaning and horse manure as acceptable. He seems, in addition, positively to have resisted all attempts at reform, giving active support to the campaign to prevent freedom of information being applied to MPs.
The Speaker\'s partisanship was clearly on show in the Commons last week when he testily rebuked two backbench MPs , Labour\'s Kate Hoey and the Liberal Democrat Norman Baker, who dared to question his judgment. Instead of raising the dignity of parliament, he had become the shop steward of those MPs who sought to milk the system.
The Speaker must be the servant of the whole House of Commons. He must, therefore, remain utterly impartial, not only between political parties, but also between backbench MPs. Michael Martin was well aware of the convention when he became the 156th Speaker in 2000. "A Speaker has a clear duty to every side of this House," he said, "especially to the backbenchers, the minority parties and the opposition parties." It is not the Speaker\'s job to criticise MPs with whom he disagrees; and once a significant group of MPs feel that he is no longer impartial, his position becomes untenable.
But the House of Commons is itself the servant of the electorate. It can only be effective if it represents the people. Survey evidence over the last few days has made it clear that the vast majority of voters wanted Martin to resign. In the circumstances, it would have been wrong of him to seek to cling on, and he has taken the only honourable course.
Martin was chosen Speaker primarily on party grounds. Under normal circumstances the new Speaker in 2000 would have been a Conservative, following Betty Boothroyd who had been a Labour MP. But many Labour MPs could not bring themselves to vote for the obvious Tory candidate, Sir George Young, on the irrelevant grounds that he was an Etonian baronet. It is likely, however, that if Sir George had been chosen Speaker, the worst excesses of the Martin regime would have been mitigated.
The new Speaker, whoever he or she is, will need to take on a quite different role, to make a fresh start. The new Speaker will have to lead the reform process, as well as ensuring that the expenses process is rationalised; that the Fees Office becomes professionalised; and that the whole procedure is properly audited by an outside body. The culture that has so far governed MPs\' expenses, the culture that Nick Clegg called one "of unwritten conventions, unspoken rules and nods and winks" must now end.
The new Speaker must work together with the prime minister and the other party leaders to satisfy voters that the scandals revealed over the past two weeks can never happen again. The new Speaker will have to persuade not only parliament but also the public that MPs have changed. He or she might perhaps adopt the role of Lady Hayman, the Lord Speaker, who has done a good job in explaining the House of Lords to various audiences. If MPs wish to regain public confidence, they must forget about tactical or party considerations. They must ask themselves just one question: who among our number is best placed to clean out the Augean stables?
But the resignation of the Speaker has wider implications. It casts a shadow over the whole parliamentary system – a system once lauded as an example for other countries to follow. That system now needs a much more radical overhaul than can be given just by the election of a new Speaker. The events of the past two weeks make Gordon Brown\'s programme of constitutional reform more relevant than it has ever been.
For more information, please visit
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/[...]/19/speaker-martin-resignation
The Translation People Expands with Acquisition of Dialogue Language Services International views: 1496
Is AI Translation Quality Really Improving? views: 1487