Clashes over Mr Speaker's re-election
Much sound and fury at Commons Business Questions this morning over, well, a number of issues. But as well as much ranting about the tax status of Conservative Party Vice Chairman Lord Ashcroft (and I'll be posting more on him in a moment) there were some pretty sharp clashes over an obscure-looking procedural issue.
The little item in question was buried in the dark recesses of Wednesday's order paper. Item 90, listed for debate on Thursday, wedged between something to do with the National Assembly for Wales, and something inscrutable about the "draft Pensions Regulator (Contribution Notices) (sum Specified following Transfer) Regulations 2010", was an amendment to the standing orders for the re-election of a former Speaker.
Today it has been bumped "below the line" into the list of orders that will be debated one day, but not today.
At issue is the procedure which takes place at the start of a new parliament. The Commons has to re-elect (or not) Mr Speaker (assuming that the voters have sent him back).
Normally, it is done by acclamation. The Father of the House (the longest-serving MP) takes the chair and puts a motion that the "former Speaker do take the Chair". Everyone shouts "Aye" and that's that.
But, under new standing orders proposed by the Procedure Committee, any member who's prepared to shout "No" will have the right to press the matter to a vote, and that vote should take place by secret ballot.
So what? It's no secret that Mr Speaker Bercow has some vitriolic critics. But an incoming government, and more particularly its individual ministers, would not want to risk openly attempting to remove a Speaker. But if there's a secret ballot, it would be far easier for those opponents to strike, either removing, or at least wounding their target.
At least one senior Conservative backbencher has been busily drumming up support for the change to be made. And this morning several enthusiasts for this move broke cover to express their displeasure. They were heavy metal Conservative backbenchers - Edward Leigh, Michael Spicer, Chris Chope and Greg Knight among them. Their complaints at the disappearance of the proposal used words like "gerrymandering" and "dissembling". They are extremely cross.
But it now looks unlikely the rule change will come before MPs in time to affect proceedings at the start of the next Parliament.
I'm Mark D'Arcy and I'll be writing about what goes on in the chambers and committee rooms at Westminster.
Comments
or to comment.