Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on who will the the next Speaker of the House of Commo

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited March 11 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on who will the the next Speaker of the House of Commons

Newsnight has learned of allegations that the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, mistreated an employee #newsnight pic.twitter.com/3qV8rtykGP

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,253
    First past the post!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited March 11
    A distant second, like England and Liverpool yesterday.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    Third, like Portsea Island.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    (I too thought it was IofW - didn't even think of Portsea as an island....)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,553
    One thing that surprised me (because someone walked it in a day): there is only 25 miles between tidal waters on Scotland's west and east coasts: (Loch Broom and Dornoch Firth respectively).

    Likewise, the River Tamar, which splits Devon from Cornwall and flows into the English channel, rises only four miles from Cornwall's north coast.

    We really are a fractal island. ;)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited March 11
    So, on topic, what do we think of the next Speaker market?

    There’s a few conventions, such as the main parties taking it in turn, or the new Speaker being from the Opposition benches. Both of which would count in favour of Lindsay Hoyle, who’s already an accomplished and well liked deputy speaker. But not at evens.

    JRM might be interested, and could he possibly be put up to it by those opposed to him politically (which includes a fair few in his own party) as a way of neutralising him as a next Tory leader candidate?

    Chris Bryant is most famous for posing in his underpants on a gay dating website, as a rule the Speaker should be someone who’s managed to stay off the front pages during their time as an MP.

    Harriet Hatemen, probably the worst choice of all.

    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited March 11
    Off topic, the pilots’ forum PPRuNe has a seriously interesting thread running on the Salisbury incident. Lots of commenters there who are ex-military and know how these things go down.
    https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/606204-sergei-skripal.html
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,047
    Sandpit said:

    So, on topic, what do we think of the next Speaker market?


    JRM might be interested, and could he possibly be put up to it by those opposed to him politically (which includes a fair few in his own party) as a way of neutralising him as a next Tory leader candidate?



    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    I doubt that JRM would consent to being 'neutralised' politically.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,553
    PeterC said:

    Sandpit said:

    So, on topic, what do we think of the next Speaker market?


    JRM might be interested, and could he possibly be put up to it by those opposed to him politically (which includes a fair few in his own party) as a way of neutralising him as a next Tory leader candidate?



    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    I doubt that JRM would consent to being 'neutralised' politically.
    It's hard to think of someone less suited to be speaker than JRM. Oh, perhaps Harriet Harman. ;)

    Oh, and Happy Mother's Day to all PB's mothers.
    And to avoid annoying Mr Dancer, happy non-specific day to you all!
  • MTimT2MTimT2 Posts: 47
    Sandpit said:

    Off topic, the pilots’ forum PPRuNe has a seriously interesting thread running on the Salisbury incident. Lots of commenters there who are ex-military and know how these things go down.
    https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/606204-sergei-skripal.html

    The lack of fatalities so far might indicate an impure preparation of sarin or tabun. The symptoms of the responding personnel are compatible with low dosage exposures to sarin or tabun. Both agents are absorbed through the skin, which would be consistent with contamination of responders.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,826

    One thing that surprised me (because someone walked it in a day): there is only 25 miles between tidal waters on Scotland's west and east coasts: (Loch Broom and Dornoch Firth respectively).

    Likewise, the River Tamar, which splits Devon from Cornwall and flows into the English channel, rises only four miles from Cornwall's north coast.

    We really are a fractal island. ;)

    Even the IoW can make the same claim, at the western end.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,826
    edited March 11
    Sandpit said:

    So, on topic, what do we think of the next Speaker market?

    There’s a few conventions, such as the main parties taking it in turn, or the new Speaker being from the Opposition benches. Both of which would count in favour of Lindsay Hoyle, who’s already an accomplished and well liked deputy speaker. But not at evens.

    JRM might be interested, and could he possibly be put up to it by those opposed to him politically (which includes a fair few in his own party) as a way of neutralising him as a next Tory leader candidate?

    Chris Bryant is most famous for posing in his underpants on a gay dating website, as a rule the Speaker should be someone who’s managed to stay off the front pages during their time as an MP.

    Harriet Hatemen, probably the worst choice of all.

    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    JRM is merely an amusement, unsuited to any job with a significant public profile. Certainly as the figurehead for our parliament in the 21st Century he would be a disastrous choice.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    Sandpit said:


    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    There I have to disagree. He's no Lenthall or Wetherill, but he tells people when to be quiet and he is actually I think also fairer than people give him credit for. He's not in hock to either party and he's willing to tell the leaders when they're making idiots of themselves.

    I think it is also worth remembering the situation he came into. Martin - possibly the worst speaker ever and certainly most blatant Brown-noser [sic] of the government since William Catesby in 1484 - had just been forced out due to his grotesque greed coupled to massive incompetence and some actual fraud among MPs over their expenses in which he was deeply implicated. Just to get through that was an achievement.

    Yes, I think his time is about done. But I'm not going to say whoever gets it will be better. Harman, Beckett or Watson would undoubtedly be worse.

    I wonder if Hilary Benn might be a candidate. I think he'd make a good speaker.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,036
    That must be an old list from Paddy Power, or whoever’s compiled it has only a hazy idea of real possibilities. Several names on there; Douglas Carswell for one, are note even in Parliament.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    So, on topic, what do we think of the next Speaker market?

    There’s a few conventions, such as the main parties taking it in turn, or the new Speaker being from the Opposition benches. Both of which would count in favour of Lindsay Hoyle, who’s already an accomplished and well liked deputy speaker. But not at evens.

    JRM might be interested, and could he possibly be put up to it by those opposed to him politically (which includes a fair few in his own party) as a way of neutralising him as a next Tory leader candidate?

    Chris Bryant is most famous for posing in his underpants on a gay dating website, as a rule the Speaker should be someone who’s managed to stay off the front pages during their time as an MP.

    Harriet Hatemen, probably the worst choice of all.

    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    JRM is merely an amusement, unsuited to any job with a significant public profile. Certainly as the figurehead for our parliament in the 21st Century he would be a disastrous choice.
    I sometimes have similar feelings about Corbyn. Then I remind myself there is nothing funny about his being in charge of one of our two major parties.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,036

    That must be an old list from Paddy Power, or whoever’s compiled it has only a hazy idea of real possibilities. Several names on there; Douglas Carswell for one, are note even in Parliament.

    Should have read all the way down TSE’s piece!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    That must be an old list from Paddy Power, or whoever’s compiled it has only a hazy idea of real possibilities. Several names on there; Douglas Carswell for one, are note even in Parliament.

    Nor is Alan Haselhurst. It looks to me as though they've not removed old candidates (I think Carswell was mooted as a possible speaker at one point several years ago).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    MTimT2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Off topic, the pilots’ forum PPRuNe has a seriously interesting thread running on the Salisbury incident. Lots of commenters there who are ex-military and know how these things go down.
    https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/606204-sergei-skripal.html

    The lack of fatalities so far might indicate an impure preparation of sarin or tabun. The symptoms of the responding personnel are compatible with low dosage exposures to sarin or tabun. Both agents are absorbed through the skin, which would be consistent with contamination of responders.
    Very interesting, thanks. Let’s hope the policeman still in hospital recovers from his exposure.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 9,072
    I wonder how many people haven't had a spat with their boss at one time or another. Whether this lady was paricularly sensitive we don't know but with just one case of a difficult relationship with an employee in a lifetime of work he clearly wasn't a serial bully. it has to be worrying if future generations are going to grow up without a backbone.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    That must be an old list from Paddy Power, or whoever’s compiled it has only a hazy idea of real possibilities. Several names on there; Douglas Carswell for one, are note even in Parliament.

    Should have read all the way down TSE’s piece!
    Would have been very interesting if Mark Reckless had been on the list... :wink:
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,087
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:


    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    There I have to disagree. He's no Lenthall or Wetherill, but he tells people when to be quiet and he is actually I think also fairer than people give him credit for. He's not in hock to either party and he's willing to tell the leaders when they're making idiots of themselves.

    I think it is also worth remembering the situation he came into. Martin - possibly the worst speaker ever and certainly most blatant Brown-noser [sic] of the government since William Catesby in 1484 - had just been forced out due to his grotesque greed coupled to massive incompetence and some actual fraud among MPs over their expenses in which he was deeply implicated. Just to get through that was an achievement.

    Yes, I think his time is about done. But I'm not going to say whoever gets it will be better. Harman, Beckett or Watson would undoubtedly be worse.

    I wonder if Hilary Benn might be a candidate. I think he'd make a good speaker.
    Hmm! Possibly, but, a bit too school masterish rather than a avuncular personality. Can't really see him being able to keep the HoC under control if it gets boisterous.

    However, other games are now coming into play about the organisation, policing and control of the HoC. Too many scandals, of which the sexist bullying is the latest, leading to discussions on possible changes to the administration of the House. Might be worth waiting to see who might be a better fit for the job.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,309
    Sandpit said:

    So, on topic, what do we think of the next Speaker market?

    There’s a few conventions, such as the main parties taking it in turn, or the new Speaker being from the Opposition benches. Both of which would count in favour of Lindsay Hoyle, who’s already an accomplished and well liked deputy speaker. But not at evens.

    JRM might be interested, and could he possibly be put up to it by those opposed to him politically (which includes a fair few in his own party) as a way of neutralising him as a next Tory leader candidate?

    Chris Bryant is most famous for posing in his underpants on a gay dating website, as a rule the Speaker should be someone who’s managed to stay off the front pages during their time as an MP.

    Harriet Hatemen, probably the worst choice of all.

    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    There is no convention of Buggins' turn for the office of Speaker.

    Since WWII there were three successive Conservative Speakers from the Labour landslide in 1945. From Horace King in 1965 there were alternate Speakers but the essence is that the governing party with a solid majority will take the position.

    Betty Boothroyd won with Conservative support against the wishes of the Tory government with a tiny majority. She was succeeded by another Labour MP Michael Martin in the Blair landslide years.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,826
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:


    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    There I have to disagree. He's no Lenthall or Wetherill, but he tells people when to be quiet and he is actually I think also fairer than people give him credit for. He's not in hock to either party and he's willing to tell the leaders when they're making idiots of themselves.

    I think it is also worth remembering the situation he came into. Martin - possibly the worst speaker ever and certainly most blatant Brown-noser [sic] of the government since William Catesby in 1484 - had just been forced out due to his grotesque greed coupled to massive incompetence and some actual fraud among MPs over their expenses in which he was deeply implicated. Just to get through that was an achievement.

    Yes, I think his time is about done. But I'm not going to say whoever gets it will be better. Harman, Beckett or Watson would undoubtedly be worse.

    I wonder if Hilary Benn might be a candidate. I think he'd make a good speaker.
    +1. Bercow does more than any other speaker to try and get our puerile MPs to behave, and speaks for the public when he names and shames during PMQs. There is no other occupation where people could behave like that and still expect to be in the job the following day.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,814
    I thought “campaigning” to become Speaker wasn’t the done thing?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,518
    L'esprit de nos jours demands that it be a woman so all male candidates are probably overpriced. Arglcu probably still hasn't been forgiven by Labour for a) coming at the king and b) missing by a mile. Laing is a Leadsome tribute act. Engels lost her seat so I'm not sure why she's on there. Beckett looks like she could drop dead at any minute. Hoey is too Leaver-y. Ditto Stewart. Harman would be a decent appointment and she's never going to get any cabinet job from JC so it would be a fine end to her career.
  • alex. said:

    I thought “campaigning” to become Speaker wasn’t the done thing?

    It is a custom more honour'd in the breach than the observance.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    JackW said:

    Sandpit said:

    So, on topic, what do we think of the next Speaker market?

    There’s a few conventions, such as the main parties taking it in turn, or the new Speaker being from the Opposition benches. Both of which would count in favour of Lindsay Hoyle, who’s already an accomplished and well liked deputy speaker. But not at evens.

    JRM might be interested, and could he possibly be put up to it by those opposed to him politically (which includes a fair few in his own party) as a way of neutralising him as a next Tory leader candidate?

    Chris Bryant is most famous for posing in his underpants on a gay dating website, as a rule the Speaker should be someone who’s managed to stay off the front pages during their time as an MP.

    Harriet Hatemen, probably the worst choice of all.

    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    There is no convention of Buggins' turn for the office of Speaker.

    Since WWII there were three successive Conservative Speakers from the Labour landslide in 1945. From Horace King in 1965 there were alternate Speakers but the essence is that the governing party with a solid majority will take the position.

    Betty Boothroyd won with Conservative support against the wishes of the Tory government with a tiny majority. She was succeeded by another Labour MP Michael Martin in the Blair landslide years.
    Thanks for the history lesson. :)

    I remember the talk of convention when Martin was appointed, because in many ways his appointment broke with tradition and was seen as part of the Blairite takeover at the time. Was still a little young to care too much when Betty took over in 1992.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    edited March 11
    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,309
    Sandpit said:

    JackW said:

    Sandpit said:

    So, on topic, what do we think of the next Speaker market?

    There’s a few conventions, such as the main parties taking it in turn, or the new Speaker being from the Opposition benches. Both of which would count in favour of Lindsay Hoyle, who’s already an accomplished and well liked deputy speaker. But not at evens.

    JRM might be interested, and could he possibly be put up to it by those opposed to him politically (which includes a fair few in his own party) as a way of neutralising him as a next Tory leader candidate?

    Chris Bryant is most famous for posing in his underpants on a gay dating website, as a rule the Speaker should be someone who’s managed to stay off the front pages during their time as an MP.

    Harriet Hatemen, probably the worst choice of all.

    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    There is no convention of Buggins' turn for the office of Speaker.

    Since WWII there were three successive Conservative Speakers from the Labour landslide in 1945. From Horace King in 1965 there were alternate Speakers but the essence is that the governing party with a solid majority will take the position.

    Betty Boothroyd won with Conservative support against the wishes of the Tory government with a tiny majority. She was succeeded by another Labour MP Michael Martin in the Blair landslide years.
    Thanks for the history lesson. :)

    I remember the talk of convention when Martin was appointed, because in many ways his appointment broke with tradition and was seen as part of the Blairite takeover at the time. Was still a little young to care too much when Betty took over in 1992.
    From your second paragraph you appear not to have learnt the "history lesson". There is no tradition or convention of alternating Speakers.

    Take 100 lines :

    "I must eat pineapple pizza every Friday night and greet the delivery driver with a rousing rendition of "Ode To Joy" .. :smile:
  • Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,814
    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
    Married to somebody on the Labour front bench as well

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    Really? I thought they'd revamped the process so it was a straightforward runoff.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    That’s because it isn’t AV. It’s multiple voting rounds, same as the MP stage of the Conservative leadership election which isn’t AV either.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,309

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    A shocking, disgraceful and most worrying omission. I advise you seek medical supervision expeditiously.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,814
    edited March 11
    ydoethur said:

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    Really? I thought they'd revamped the process so it was a straightforward runoff.
    AV/the current system was the reform. Which was a bit problematic because it meant changing the way MPs cast their votes. Previous system was just piling through the lobbies voting on individuals until one of them got a majority
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,000
    edited March 11
    ydoethur said:

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    Really? I thought they'd revamped the process so it was a straightforward runoff.
    The House of Commons Procedure Committee then re-examined the means of electing a Speaker and recommended a new system that came into effect in 2007 and was first used in June 2009, following the resignation of Michael Martin.

    Under the new system, candidates must be nominated by at least twelve members, of whom at least three must be of a different party from the candidate. Each member may nominate no more than one candidate.

    The House then votes by secret ballot; an absolute majority (in the UK sense, i.e. more than 50% of the votes cast) is required for victory. If no candidate wins a majority, then the individual with the fewest votes is eliminated, as are any other candidates who receive less than five percent of the votes cast. The House continues to vote, for several rounds if necessary, until one member receives the requisite majority.

    Then, the House votes on a formal motion to appoint the member in question to the Speakership. (In the unlikely event that this motion fails, the House must hold a fresh series of ballots on all of the nominees.)

    https://tinyurl.com/AVIsMagicFPTPIsTragic
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,036
    ydoethur said:

    That must be an old list from Paddy Power, or whoever’s compiled it has only a hazy idea of real possibilities. Several names on there; Douglas Carswell for one, are note even in Parliament.

    Should have read all the way down TSE’s piece!
    Would have been very interesting if Mark Reckless had been on the list... :wink:
    He’ll be out of the Senedd next time as well.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Good morning, everyone.

    Bring back wigs. And tights. And the frilly shirt. None of this Bercow supply teacher outfit nonsense.

    Shouldn't be Harman. She's been too senior in the Labour Party to avoid allegations of bias, and after the likes of Martin and Bercow it'd be splendid to have a Speaker who didn't favour one side or the other.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 918
    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
    Married to somebody on the Labour front bench as well

    I'd also worry that she seems to have a particularly poor grasp of legal procedure. Was it Harrriet Harman who came out with the 'guilty in the court of public opinion' stuff?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,309

    Good morning, everyone.

    Bring back wigs. And tights. And the frilly shirt. None of this Bercow supply teacher outfit nonsense

    OGH and TSE have the wherewithal to assist .... allegedly .... :smile:

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,253

    ydoethur said:

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    Really? I thought they'd revamped the process so it was a straightforward runoff.
    The House of Commons Procedure Committee then re-examined the means of electing a Speaker and recommended a new system that came into effect in 2007 and was first used in June 2009, following the resignation of Michael Martin.

    Under the new system, candidates must be nominated by at least twelve members, of whom at least three must be of a different party from the candidate. Each member may nominate no more than one candidate.

    The House then votes by secret ballot; an absolute majority (in the UK sense, i.e. more than 50% of the votes cast) is required for victory. If no candidate wins a majority, then the individual with the fewest votes is eliminated, as are any other candidates who receive less than five percent of the votes cast. The House continues to vote, for several rounds if necessary, until one member receives the requisite majority.

    Then, the House votes on a formal motion to appoint the member in question to the Speakership. (In the unlikely event that this motion fails, the House must hold a fresh series of ballots on all of the nominees.)

    https://tinyurl.com/AVIsMagicFPTPIsTragic
    What an excellent system. Perhaps we could use such a system for Westminster elections? Certainly worth a thread...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Cookie said:

    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
    Married to somebody on the Labour front bench as well

    I'd also worry that she seems to have a particularly poor grasp of legal procedure. Was it Harrriet Harman who came out with the 'guilty in the court of public opinion' stuff?
    Very poor grasp of the law for a QC, most certainly.
  • Cookie said:

    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
    Married to somebody on the Labour front bench as well

    I'd also worry that she seems to have a particularly poor grasp of legal procedure. Was it Harrriet Harman who came out with the 'guilty in the court of public opinion' stuff?
    She did, very shocking considering she’s a former Solicitor-General.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Mr. W, ah ha! So, the rumours of PB staff cross-dressing are true!

    I can see Mr. Eagles as a Frankenfurter.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,309

    Mr. W, ah ha! So, the rumours of PB staff cross-dressing are true!

    I can see Mr. Eagles as a Frankenfurter.

    Apparently so. All started by Peter the Puntress whose prowess in the art made Danny La Rue and Lily Savage appear like puritans at a League of Decency and Virtue Festival.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694

    Mr. W, ah ha! So, the rumours of PB staff cross-dressing are true!

    I can see Mr. Eagles as a Frankenfurter.

    It’s just a jump to the left....
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,535
    Morning all. This is a cry for help. I have an idea for a series of non-partisan thread headers based around the swings at the last election. However, in order to do these, I need to produce some maps. Sadly, my cartographic skills are pretty much non-existent and despite some helpful information from @tlg86 I have to recognise my talents lie elsewhere. Is there someone out there more skilled who would be able to work with me on this?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,023
    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
    Married to somebody on the Labour front bench as well

    Perhaps Harman's old man could follow the example of Lady Howe who famously resigned as head of the Equal Opportunities Commission so her husband could become Chancellor.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    F1: intriguingly, Ladbrokes has a race winner market up but no odds. Is this a philosophical statement? A rhetorical pondering of the inherent meaning and value of gambling? Did somebody just forget that odds are required to bet? :p

    In worse news, Sporting Index still has the ineffably rubbish ranking index market but there's no sign of the points markets.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,266

    ydoethur said:

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    Really? I thought they'd revamped the process so it was a straightforward runoff.
    The House of Commons Procedure Committee then re-examined the means of electing a Speaker and recommended a new system that came into effect in 2007 and was first used in June 2009, following the resignation of Michael Martin.

    Under the new system, candidates must be nominated by at least twelve members, of whom at least three must be of a different party from the candidate. Each member may nominate no more than one candidate.

    The House then votes by secret ballot; an absolute majority (in the UK sense, i.e. more than 50% of the votes cast) is required for victory. If no candidate wins a majority, then the individual with the fewest votes is eliminated, as are any other candidates who receive less than five percent of the votes cast. The House continues to vote, for several rounds if necessary, until one member receives the requisite majority.

    Then, the House votes on a formal motion to appoint the member in question to the Speakership. (In the unlikely event that this motion fails, the House must hold a fresh series of ballots on all of the nominees.)

    https://tinyurl.com/AVIsMagicFPTPIsTragic
    Isn't that called multi-round FPTP?

    *gets coat*
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,648
    Can’t see past Hoyle - he’s better than Bercow by miles.


    Red kippers for breakfast anyone ?


  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,253
    JackW said:

    Mr. W, ah ha! So, the rumours of PB staff cross-dressing are true!

    I can see Mr. Eagles as a Frankenfurter.

    Apparently so. All started by Peter the Puntress whose prowess in the art made Danny La Rue and Lily Savage appear like puritans at a League of Decency and Virtue Festival.
    We all have to keep up with current mores, especially those of us who identify as Jacobite nobility.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,253
    IanB2 said:

    One thing that surprised me (because someone walked it in a day): there is only 25 miles between tidal waters on Scotland's west and east coasts: (Loch Broom and Dornoch Firth respectively).

    Likewise, the River Tamar, which splits Devon from Cornwall and flows into the English channel, rises only four miles from Cornwall's north coast.

    We really are a fractal island. ;)

    Even the IoW can make the same claim, at the western end.
    The Medina river nearly bisects the Isle of Wight, with the East and West Wight of quite different character. On the Isle all roads go via the notorious Newport roundabout.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    Sandpit said:

    Cookie said:

    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
    Married to somebody on the Labour front bench as well

    I'd also worry that she seems to have a particularly poor grasp of legal procedure. Was it Harrriet Harman who came out with the 'guilty in the court of public opinion' stuff?
    Very poor grasp of the law for a QC, most certainly.
    I'm stunned. I never realised she was a QC. I thought she practiced (briefly and without distinction) as a solicitor. Certainly her rambling, often inaccurate and usually incoherent performances at the despatch box don't suggest somebody trained in cross-examination.

    Doesn't say much for the legal profession (saving the presence of Messrs Eagles and Meeks) if somebody as awe-inspiringly incompetent as Harman could take silk.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    TGOHF said:
    I wonder if this is the Times or the plaice for such a thing?

    Oh, my coat...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    Really? I thought they'd revamped the process so it was a straightforward runoff.
    The House of Commons Procedure Committee then re-examined the means of electing a Speaker and recommended a new system that came into effect in 2007 and was first used in June 2009, following the resignation of Michael Martin.

    Under the new system, candidates must be nominated by at least twelve members, of whom at least three must be of a different party from the candidate. Each member may nominate no more than one candidate.

    The House then votes by secret ballot; an absolute majority (in the UK sense, i.e. more than 50% of the votes cast) is required for victory. If no candidate wins a majority, then the individual with the fewest votes is eliminated, as are any other candidates who receive less than five percent of the votes cast. The House continues to vote, for several rounds if necessary, until one member receives the requisite majority.

    Then, the House votes on a formal motion to appoint the member in question to the Speakership. (In the unlikely event that this motion fails, the House must hold a fresh series of ballots on all of the nominees.)

    https://tinyurl.com/AVIsMagicFPTPIsTragic
    Isn't that called multi-round FPTP?

    *gets coat*
    Isn't it just Devil Takes The Hindmost?
  • ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Cookie said:

    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
    Married to somebody on the Labour front bench as well

    I'd also worry that she seems to have a particularly poor grasp of legal procedure. Was it Harrriet Harman who came out with the 'guilty in the court of public opinion' stuff?
    Very poor grasp of the law for a QC, most certainly.
    I'm stunned. I never realised she was a QC. I thought she practiced (briefly and without distinction) as a solicitor. Certainly her rambling, often inaccurate and usually incoherent performances at the despatch box don't suggest somebody trained in cross-examination.

    Doesn't say much for the legal profession (saving the presence of Messrs Eagles and Meeks) if somebody as awe-inspiringly incompetent as Harman could take silk.
    From 2001 when she was appointed Solicitor-General.

    The Lord Chancellor's Department confirmed that Ms Harman has been appointed a practising, rather than honorary, QC, even though she does not meet the normal criteria for silks:

    https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/solicitor-general-harman-goes-on-to-become-a-silk/34155.article
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Cookie said:

    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Harman would be a decent appointment

    She really, really wouldn't. Harman was so useless in her one major government role that even Tony Blair felt he had to sack her. Bearing in mind this is a man who made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary after her own party called for her sacking over the Rural Patments agency shambles.

    Moreover as twice leader of the Labour Party Harman's ruled out under partisanship conventions.
    Married to somebody on the Labour front bench as well

    I'd also worry that she seems to have a particularly poor grasp of legal procedure. Was it Harrriet Harman who came out with the 'guilty in the court of public opinion' stuff?
    Very poor grasp of the law for a QC, most certainly.
    I'm stunned. I never realised she was a QC. I thought she practiced (briefly and without distinction) as a solicitor. Certainly her rambling, often inaccurate and usually incoherent performances at the despatch box don't suggest somebody trained in cross-examination.

    Doesn't say much for the legal profession (saving the presence of Messrs Eagles and Meeks) if somebody as awe-inspiringly incompetent as Harman could take silk.
    From 2001 when she was appointed Solicitor-General.

    The Lord Chancellor's Department confirmed that Ms Harman has been appointed a practising, rather than honorary, QC, even though she does not meet the normal criteria for silks:

    https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/solicitor-general-harman-goes-on-to-become-a-silk/34155.article
    Hell's bloody bells. That is crazy.

    As for 'practising,' she could certainly do with practice...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF said:
    I wonder if this is the Times or the plaice for such a thing?

    Oh, my coat...
    Is this cod philosophy.....?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 11,009
    If Speaker B is ousted it will surely be the eminently sensible and popular Lindsay Hoyle who takes over?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    edited March 11
    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Mr. Mark, there's an even 2/2 split, by convention, between the blues and reds so it won't harm/help either party. I think.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF said:
    I wonder if this is the Times or the plaice for such a thing?

    Oh, my coat...
    Is this cod philosophy.....?
    Nah, I'm just trying to save a few lost soles and having a whale of a time.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,518

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    I don't think even May could contrive to lose a by election in Bercow's constituency.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    By convention he would be given a peerage and go to the Lords as a crossbencher.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,324

    Morning all. This is a cry for help. I have an idea for a series of non-partisan thread headers based around the swings at the last election. However, in order to do these, I need to produce some maps. Sadly, my cartographic skills are pretty much non-existent and despite some helpful information from @tlg86 I have to recognise my talents lie elsewhere. Is there someone out there more skilled who would be able to work with me on this?

    Unfortunately I don't have ArcGIS on my computer at my current work otherwise I could have put something together.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    edited March 11
    Dura_Ace said:

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    I don't think even May could contrive to lose a by election in Bercow's constituency.
    On a more serious point, I have always thought the Speaker should not have a constituency. Buckingham has effectively been without an MP for nine years, before that Glasgow Springburn/North East was for the same amount of time. Surely it would be better for a Speaker to become MP for the Palace of Westminster and hold a by-election in their former seat so normal constituency life can carry on?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,000
    edited March 11

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    Convention says he resigns his seat and gets a peerage, but there's nothing stopping him staying on as an MP, on becoming Speaker one gives up one's party affiliation for life, no way will Mrs May let him take the Tory whip.

    Hoyle becoming Speaker has no impact on the majority, as a Deputy Speaker will be chosen from the Tory side as the number of Speakers/Deputy Speakers is always 2 from the Blues and 2 from the Reds.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    By convention he takes the Chiltern Hundreds and goes to sit on the red benches, but knowing Bercow he’d probably hang around like a bad smell plotting with Anna Soubry to stop Brexit.

    The Speaker has three deputies, who (also by convention) are one from his or her side of the House, and two from the other - presumably to avoid a change in Speaker affecting the Parliamentary arithmetic as none of the four vote in Parliament.
    https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/principal/deputy-speakers/
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    Convention says he resigns his seat and gets a peerage, but there's nothing stopping him staying on as an MP, on becoming Speaker one gives up one's party affiliation for life, no way will Mrs May let him take the Tory whip.

    Hoyle becoming Speaker has no impact on the majority, as a Deputy Speaker will be chosen from the Tory side as the number of Speakers/Deputy Speakers is always 2 from the Blues and 2 from the Reds.
    Ah yes, forgotten about Deputies. Maybe Sinn Fein could be offered a job?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    edited March 11

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    Convention says he resigns his seat and gets a peerage, but there's nothing stopping him staying on as an MP, on becoming Speaker one gives up one's party affiliation for life, no way will Mrs May let him take the Tory whip.

    Hoyle becoming Speaker has no impact on the majority, as a Deputy Speaker will be chosen from the Tory side as the number of Speakers/Deputy Speakers is always 2 from the Blues and 2 from the Reds.
    Unless Labour or the Liberal Democrats gain Buckingham of course.

    Seems improbable but then so did Corbyn, Brexit, Trump...

    Edit - who was the last Speaker to assume a partisan role in the Commons post-speakership? Do we have to go right back to Addington or was it Manners-Sutton?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,344
    Like IanB2 and ydoethur I rate Bercow quite highly and think that the vote of no confidence will get nowhere (like the last attempt), but assuming the premise of his departure:

    * Hoyle is clearly the uncontroversial choice. I don't know anyone who dislikes or distrusts him, and quite a lot rate his performance when he's in the chair quite highly. But it does increase the Government's majority by 1 at a time when that might actually matter.
    * The spirit of the times arguably calls for a woman. Laing would also be a pretty uncontroversial choice. Not sure any of the other women on the list would be, though Harman would obviously send a big message of support for women, whereas Laing hasn't AFAIK expressed many views on gender equality.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,266
    edited March 11

    Like IanB2 and ydoethur I rate Bercow quite highly and think that the vote of no confidence will get nowhere (like the last attempt), but assuming the premise of his departure:

    * Hoyle is clearly the uncontroversial choice. I don't know anyone who dislikes or distrusts him, and quite a lot rate his performance when he's in the chair quite highly. But it does increase the Government's majority by 1 at a time when that might actually matter.
    * The spirit of the times arguably calls for a woman. Laing would also be a pretty uncontroversial choice. Not sure any of the other women on the list would be, though Harman would obviously send a big message of support for women, whereas Laing hasn't AFAIK expressed many views on gender equality.

    Wouldn't the replacement deputy speaker be from the Tory benches, so it would have no impact on the majority? On your second point, hopefully whoever is elected is elected by virtue of their abilities, not their gender.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,535
    On topic, I never bet on next Speaker. There’s too much relevant information I don’t know and can never know.

    Betting against the Speaker being deposed, however, that’s a very different matter...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,201
    I see helping to kill West Ham United FC can be added to Boris Johnson’s list of accomplishments :-D

    Got in from Hong Kong this morning. The woman on passport control said “Wrlcome home, sir”. It’s never happened to me before. I rather liked it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,266

    I see helping to kill West Ham United FC can be added to Boris Johnson’s list of accomplishments :-D

    Got in from Hong Kong this morning. The woman on passport control said “Wrlcome home, sir”. It’s never happened to me before. I rather liked it.

    You mean you don't use the electronic gates? It's bliss.. you don't have to interact with grumpy border guards. :p
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,611
    RobD said:

    I see helping to kill West Ham United FC can be added to Boris Johnson’s list of accomplishments :-D

    Got in from Hong Kong this morning. The woman on passport control said “Wrlcome home, sir”. It’s never happened to me before. I rather liked it.

    You mean you don't use the electronic gates? It's bliss.. you don't have to interact with grumpy border guards. :p
    A former colleague of mine always went through Customs everywhere with a face like thunder. He said he never got stopped. "Not worth the hassle, that one...."
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,463
    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    Really? I thought they'd revamped the process so it was a straightforward runoff.
    The House of Commons Procedure Committee then re-examined the means of electing a Speaker and recommended a new system that came into effect in 2007 and was first used in June 2009, following the resignation of Michael Martin.

    Under the new system, candidates must be nominated by at least twelve members, of whom at least three must be of a different party from the candidate. Each member may nominate no more than one candidate.

    The House then votes by secret ballot; an absolute majority (in the UK sense, i.e. more than 50% of the votes cast) is required for victory. If no candidate wins a majority, then the individual with the fewest votes is eliminated, as are any other candidates who receive less than five percent of the votes cast. The House continues to vote, for several rounds if necessary, until one member receives the requisite majority.

    Then, the House votes on a formal motion to appoint the member in question to the Speakership. (In the unlikely event that this motion fails, the House must hold a fresh series of ballots on all of the nominees.)

    https://tinyurl.com/AVIsMagicFPTPIsTragic
    Isn't that called multi-round FPTP?
    China can ignore such arcane disputes.... 2 out of 2964 in the legislative assembly voted against Xi's scheme to become president for life:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-43361276
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867

    On topic, I never bet on next Speaker. There’s too much relevant information I don’t know and can never know.

    Betting against the Speaker being deposed, however, that’s a very different matter...

    I believe it's happened twice - Syr Sion Trefor (Sir John Trevor) over taking bribes in 1695 and Michael Martin over being the most useless Speaker since Catesby the expenses scandal.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,041
    A Moonlight poll - " shows the SNP on 34%, Labour on 30% and the Tories on 24% "

    https://www.theredrobin.scot/shock_poll_shows_labour_rapidly_gaining_on_snp
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,378
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:


    Small money on JRM for me, but whoever wins will be a mile better than the odious Bercow.

    There I have to disagree. He's no Lenthall or Wetherill, but he tells people when to be quiet and he is actually I think also fairer than people give him credit for. He's not in hock to either party and he's willing to tell the leaders when they're making idiots of themselves.

    I think it is also worth remembering the situation he came into. Martin - possibly the worst speaker ever and certainly most blatant Brown-noser [sic] of the government since William Catesby in 1484 - had just been forced out due to his grotesque greed coupled to massive incompetence and some actual fraud among MPs over their expenses in which he was deeply implicated. Just to get through that was an achievement.

    Yes, I think his time is about done. But I'm not going to say whoever gets it will be better. Harman, Beckett or Watson would undoubtedly be worse.

    I wonder if Hilary Benn might be a candidate. I think he'd make a good speaker.
    +1. Bercow does more than any other speaker to try and get our puerile MPs to behave, and speaks for the public when he names and shames during PMQs. There is no other occupation where people could behave like that and still expect to be in the job the following day.
    It's just political theater. If the public truly cared about the theater of pmqs being awful our mps would soon stop. You see versions of the theater in local councils, foreign parliaments, all over. I'd prefer a bit less baying and childishness at pmqs, but I think the complaints about how oh so terrible it is gets overblown and histrionic. Bercow's style is just another part of the theater.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    Mr. B, I'm guessing they pressed the wrong button by mistake.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,378

    I see helping to kill West Ham United FC can be added to Boris Johnson’s list of accomplishments :-D

    Got in from Hong Kong this morning. The woman on passport control said “Wrlcome home, sir”. It’s never happened to me before. I rather liked it.

    Probably new in the job
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,470
    Marr challenged McDonnell on his appearances on Russia Today and when asked if he is going to continue he said no he would not appear again

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,492
    edited March 11
    The Guardian... never knowingly seeing the bigger picture.. avoiding the fact that the other 710,000 odd must have been false declarations...
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/nhs-agency-falsely-accuses-more-than-340000-of-prescription-fraud/ar-BBK51RA?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartandhp
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,463
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF said:
    I wonder if this is the Times or the plaice for such a thing?

    Oh, my coat...
    Is this cod philosophy.....?
    Nah, I'm just trying to save a few lost soles and having a whale of a time.
    And clearly a dab hand at it.

    I've always thought there's something of the monkfish about Gove....

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,201
    RobD said:

    I see helping to kill West Ham United FC can be added to Boris Johnson’s list of accomplishments :-D

    Got in from Hong Kong this morning. The woman on passport control said “Wrlcome home, sir”. It’s never happened to me before. I rather liked it.

    You mean you don't use the electronic gates? It's bliss.. you don't have to interact with grumpy border guards. :p

    They weren’t open. Too early in the morning I guess.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,492

    I see helping to kill West Ham United FC can be added to Boris Johnson’s list of accomplishments :-D

    Got in from Hong Kong this morning. The woman on passport control said “Wrlcome home, sir”. It’s never happened to me before. I rather liked it.

    Did they play Peters and Lee to you too?

    https://www.bing.com/search?q=welcome+home+peters+and+lee&form=EDGHPT&qs=AS&cvid=23b44d8f20f741adac73534f05405691&cc=GB&setlang=en-US
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,378
    RobD said:

    Like IanB2 and ydoethur I rate Bercow quite highly and think that the vote of no confidence will get nowhere (like the last attempt), but assuming the premise of his departure:

    * Hoyle is clearly the uncontroversial choice. I don't know anyone who dislikes or distrusts him, and quite a lot rate his performance when he's in the chair quite highly. But it does increase the Government's majority by 1 at a time when that might actually matter.
    * The spirit of the times arguably calls for a woman. Laing would also be a pretty uncontroversial choice. Not sure any of the other women on the list would be, though Harman would obviously send a big message of support for women, whereas Laing hasn't AFAIK expressed many views on gender equality.

    Wouldn't the replacement deputy speaker be from the Tory benches, so it would have no impact on the majority? On your second point, hopefully whoever is elected is elected by virtue of their abilities, not their gender.
    Moreover how do the spirit of the times even call for it? It's not like we've never had a female speaker, and female mp numbers are, iirc, at their highest ever (albeit not yet close to 50%) so it's not as though there's a glass ceiling to break through with it.

    There's bound to be done great female candidates and good luck to them, but I'm not entirely sure how the time speaks to it one way or another.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,463

    Mr. B, I'm guessing they pressed the wrong button by mistake.

    A possibly fatal one.

  • MetatronMetatron Posts: 124
    Harriet Harman is a highly tribal politician (as was Martin) and feminist fundamentalist.That has to put her in a tricky position.
    People would be looking to see how she treats a Tory mp like Phillip Davies who is critical of modern feminism .She is vulnerable to either being seen as biased against him or trying too hard to not be biased and giving preferential treatment to a Phillip Davies type.
    The same applies to JRM if he became speaker
    It is best for a speaker not to be coming into the job with well known diversive views
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 8,387
    ydoethur said:

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    Convention says he resigns his seat and gets a peerage, but there's nothing stopping him staying on as an MP, on becoming Speaker one gives up one's party affiliation for life, no way will Mrs May let him take the Tory whip.

    Hoyle becoming Speaker has no impact on the majority, as a Deputy Speaker will be chosen from the Tory side as the number of Speakers/Deputy Speakers is always 2 from the Blues and 2 from the Reds.
    Unless Labour or the Liberal Democrats gain Buckingham of course.

    Seems improbable but then so did Corbyn, Brexit, Trump...

    Edit - who was the last Speaker to assume a partisan role in the Commons post-speakership? Do we have to go right back to Addington or was it Manners-Sutton?
    Improbable in this definition is about as likely to happen as Spurs now winning the CL this year...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,867
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF said:
    I wonder if this is the Times or the plaice for such a thing?

    Oh, my coat...
    Is this cod philosophy.....?
    Nah, I'm just trying to save a few lost soles and having a whale of a time.
    And clearly a dab hand at it.

    I've always thought there's something of the monkfish about Gove....

    He's a net loss to good governance?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,378

    If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...

    But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....

    I don't have it to hand but Erskine May I believe goes so far as to say usually retiring speakers become cross bench peers.

    Though Bercow does not like tradition of course.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,483
    edited March 11
    Mr. B, yeah, although for Xi as well, I think. If he makes removing him peacefully impossible, then it'll happen through violence. Qin Xi Huangdi couldn't rule forever, and neither will Xi.

    Edited extra bit: well, possibly he'll hang on until he dies, but then there'll be bloodletting over the succession.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,463
    edited March 11
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF said:
    I wonder if this is the Times or the plaice for such a thing?

    Oh, my coat...
    Is this cod philosophy.....?
    Nah, I'm just trying to save a few lost soles and having a whale of a time.
    And clearly a dab hand at it.

    I've always thought there's something of the monkfish about Gove....

    He's a net loss to good governance?
    To the scales of Justice, certainly.

    (He's now the hagfish at AgFish...)
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,087
    TGOHF said:
    Just checked on Wikipedia, remembered that Gove had some connection with Scottish Fishing. Gove and Ruthie continuing in the effort to split the fishing communities from the SNP.

    "Gove was born in Edinburgh and originally forenamed Graham by his biological mother;[14] at the age of four months he was adopted by a Labour-supporting family in Aberdeen, where he was brought up.[15] His adoptive father ran a fish processing business; his adoptive mother was a lab assistant at the University of Aberdeen before working at the Aberdeen School for the Deaf.[16]"
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,378
    calum said:

    A Moonlight poll - " shows the SNP on 34%, Labour on 30% and the Tories on 24% "

    https://www.theredrobin.scot/shock_poll_shows_labour_rapidly_gaining_on_snp

    Reverting to form, the Scots? Well, SCON reached some dizzying heights (for them in recent decades) and can be proud if that.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,378
    Nigelb said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Forgot to mention in the thread header the voting system used to elect a new Speaker is AV.

    Really? I thought they'd revamped the process so it was a straightforward runoff.
    The House of Commons Procedure Committee then re-examined the means of electing a Speaker and recommended a new system that came into effect in 2007 and was first used in June 2009, following the resignation of Michael Martin.

    Under the new system, candidates must be nominated by at least twelve members, of whom at least three must be of a different party from the candidate. Each member may nominate no more than one candidate.

    The House then votes by secret ballot; an absolute majority (in the UK sense, i.e. more than 50% of the votes cast) is required for victory. If no candidate wins a majority, then the individual with the fewest votes is eliminated, as are any other candidates who receive less than five percent of the votes cast. The House continues to vote, for several rounds if necessary, until one member receives the requisite majority.

    Then, the House votes on a formal motion to appoint the member in question to the Speakership. (In the unlikely event that this motion fails, the House must hold a fresh series of ballots on all of the nominees.)

    https://tinyurl.com/AVIsMagicFPTPIsTragic
    Isn't that called multi-round FPTP?
    China can ignore such arcane disputes.... 2 out of 2964 in the legislative assembly voted against Xi's scheme to become president for life:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-43361276
    I'm amazed it was more than zero. I wonder if Xi actually wanted a few people to vote against, like dictators rigging their reelection deciding they should get 97% or something, as 98 is too implausible but 96 too tight a finish.
This discussion has been closed.