And another thing…

He was kicked out as speaker and no way should he go to the Lords.

Quite right. Good stuff.

But, while I hope Labour get trashed at the GE for allowing Brown a walk-over, I fear that the Tories will be Tories such as we have not seen for a long, long time. We will be putting the Hellfire Club in charge of the country. Arrogant, droit de siegneur asserting thugs. Rapists of the country.

Who do I blame? The Labour Party. That’s who.

“If only one of them deserved the honour of a peerage…”

If only, eh?

Well said. I’ve got no problem with him going upstairs.

Oops. Forgot to change the name back after me little joke. Sorry. That was me denouncing everybody. But you knew that.

Election to the upper house has never been dependent on worth.

Don’t ever criticise a Lib Dem again you left-wing, civil liberties-eroding, Iraq-invading, top-up fees-implementing, railway-privatising, Gordon Brown-hating, Tony Blair fanboi!

Read Dizzy

http://dizzythinks.net/2009/07/lord-michael-martin-wtf.html

That’s why not

tom you have to look at the fact that his performance and management of the expenses saga turned it into a fiasco.

he may well be a nice fella but why do labour insist on rewarding everyone who fails?

can you also let me know what 0% rises mean?

is this going to be in the labour manifesto for the next election?

cripes i dread to think what your cuts would be!

How utterly typical of the New Labour mindset. I’ve had my snout in the trough for thirty years, so the very least I deserve is another thirty years troughing in the Lords.

And whilst it’s quite alright for us to elevate our chums to the Lords so they can take jobs in government, we’re not going to tolerate any criticism from a jumped up, Lib Dem appointee.

Your socialist founding fathers must be so proud.

“He retains the respect and affection of a majority of MPs. ”

erm – so why did he get slung out on his ear then…?

Simon – You might have missed it but he wasn’t thrown out on his ear. He resigned.

Ok, some don’t think Michael Martin deserves a peerage. Would you like me to name some others, who might be a lot more questionable, who have peerages?

Go on, dare me. I’m prepared to include the late Lord Kagan. It’s not party political as as as I’m concerned. Did you know that Kagan was a relative of ‘Iron’ Lazar Kaganovich, one of Stalin’s senior henchmen who survived to see the demise of the UUSR?

No. Thought not. Ignorant eejits.

@Tom Simon – You might have missed it but he wasn’t thrown out on his ear. He resigned.

He resigned before he was thrown out on his ear. Er… jump…push…before…etc

You’re surely not suggesting Speaker Martin resigned because he retained the respect and affection of a majority of MPs are you now Tom?

“You’re surely not suggesting Speaker Martin resigned because he retained the respect and affection of a majority of MPs are you now Tom?”

No, I’m suggesting he resigned despite retaining the respect and affection of a majority of MPs. He would have survived a confidence vote, but it would have been too humiliating even to weather it.

“He would have survived a confidence vote”

Do you ever wonder why the public feels disconnected from politicians?

“No, I’m suggesting he resigned despite retaining the respect and affection of a majority of MPs.”

Having acted ostensibly as their shop steward as much as their referee, having spent 100s of thousands of pounds attempting to block even the redacted version of MPs expenses, he could hardly not have curried their favour. It seems to me fitting that he should be enobled as he has summed up the perfect corruption of our democratic system by new labour – greed and entitlement shielded by privellege and arrogance. He has even tried to have his son selected for his seat in a wonderful example of the hereditary principle – shame he’s only going to be a life peer, eh? So yeah, affection for the guardian of their right to rob (Morley and the phantom mortgage is prima facie fraud, no?) is inevitable.

Ennoble him. Revel in diminishing the upper house further and pay off a man who valiantly fought to preserve MPs dirty secrets.

Paul Martin didn’t seek to stand in nhis father’s seat, and if he had wanted to he would have needed to be democratically chosen by local members. That’s nothing to do with the hereditary principle.

That comment, Shaun, exposes you as a nasty, bitter and stupid individual.

“That comment, Shaun, exposes you as a nasty, bitter and stupid individual.”

OR as one who remembers the Dunwoody debacle!

No, Shaun – i was referring to the whole of your original comment, not just the part where you obsess about political parties’ internal selection procedures.

Amazing, isn’t it, how those who’ve never had the bottle to stand for election to anything are such experts!

Sir Fred Godwin was a very good banker (or at least I assume so – he was promoted and knighted) until his dramatic failure in a crisis.

Back then you thought he should only get what his contract gave him, rather than extra awards for his previous years of good service (http://www.tomharris.org.uk/2009/03/02/a-new-law-isnt-the-answer-to-the-fred-problem/).

Why is Michael Martin different? In other circumstances, this would be called ‘rewards for failure’.

Perhaps a better idea might be a democratically elected second chamber. Then Martin could stand. If he were to win, he’d have a seat and if he were to lose, he wouldn’t.

So now Tom some one that does not agree with you is
“a nasty, bitter and stupid individual.”

How very labour just start calling names.

I know Lord Oakshott quite well, (I live in Seagrove Bay), and while he can be somewhat ascerbic it is seldom undeserved. Given Martin’s pathetic behavior as speaker, he deserves far greater oprobium than Oakshott’s fairly mild remark.

After 12 years of New Labour’s failure in a list not limited to Crime, Education, the Economy, Defence, Iraq, Civil Liberties, massive Taxation (with even more to pay), PFI, Constituional Reform, contempt for Parliament and Democracy are there many people in this country who are not nasty and bitter?

Stupid? That’d be this Government who seem to believe that they can get us to accept black is white. Unfortunately Ciadini and in addition the whole NLP circus has had its day and we’re just not buying it anymore.

“Amazing, isn’t it, how those who’ve never had the bottle to stand for election to anything are such experts!”

Considering that those who’ve not stood encompasses the vast majority of 60 million people, not least the vast majority of your your constituents, I’d hope sincerely that you;d not reject our opinions solely on that basis.

Equally I don’t think I ‘obsessed’ about your party’s selection proceedures, I merely remarked upon what you euphemistically refer to as the ‘output’ which I contend is your predilection, as a party, for replacing one MP with their child (Dunwoody or Martin) or promulgating a dynasty (Benn – with their youngest scion assigned to Worthing, no?)…

Yeah, right. It would be much more democratic if we prevented politicians’ children from standing for public office…

Yes, much better to promote them, right?

Nothing wrong with following your parents into politics, but can we really believe that the east worthing labour party selected a 17 year old as their candidate because of her extensive experience of the real world rather than because she’s the granddaughter and niece of labour cabinet ministers?

Who is to say Michael Martin would have got through a confidence motion?

jaymason – do you think it’s remotely possible that MPs might be a touch more familiar with the House of Commons and how it might vote than the general public?

You do manage to make it look like a very remote possibility, Tom…

Martin’s behaviour over expenses was disgraceful. Still, Labour does SO love to reward failure, doesn’t it – as long as you do as you are told, that’s fine, isn’t it?

And now we have two diehard opponents of the Lords there as well, as Brown continues to stuff it with his placemen and women. Lord and Lady Kinnock – Kinnock a bye-word for a failed politician, elevated way above his capability, and some many millions better off thanks to the taxpayer.

Tom – how DO politicians become millionaires? One might almost imagine the Kinnocks were moonlighting as well. But Gordon wouldn’t allow that, would he?

Looks like your old department is stuffed eh? 16 billion short? Whoops! Never mind – there’s always the taxpayer; we have bottomless pockets according to Brown. Even with the economy growing vigourously at 0% for two years.

5 Year MOTs for politicians please. They do even more damage than teachers.

@Tom Harris Wednesday 1 July 2009 at 11:17 pm

jaymason – do you think it’s remotely possible that MPs might be a touch more familiar with the House of Commons and how it might vote than the general public?
/////////////////////////////////////////

Tom,

Forgotten who you represent then? It is the general public, NOT the Labour party.

No wonder we are in such a bloody mess, with your responsibilities as an MP so unclear.

“5 Year MOTs for politicians please. They do even more damage than teachers.”

We already have that – it’s called a general election.

“We already have that – it’s called a general election.”

So can we have one now, please?

Of course. After all, it’s so old fashioned to allow the Prime Minister to choose the date of an election – far better, obviously, to allow people who read and comment on political blogs to have the final say…

Well if the Prime Ditherer actually had an ounce of the courage he sees fit to write about it others, maybe he wouldn’t have bottled out of holding an election…

Failing that, Tom, I hope you can still note the difference between me asking politely (I said please!) if we could have an election now – in response to your view that it is how we ‘MOT’ MPs and me demanding that you give me what I want and to hell with the constitution.

There’ll be no election until the Irish Referendum is done. That done, it matters not a jot when Labour get kicked out, as we will have been handed over to the EU, an organisation for which none of us have ever voted, lock, stock and barrel; the likes of Brown and Blair can then move into the EU, have say over lives despite us not voting for them, and get huge salaries and pensions, even though both are fully catered for already.

Politicians and bureaucrats versus the rest. Let’s hear it for Lord Meddlesome’s “Post-democratic era”. That’s one thing – one very rare thing – he has not lied about.

Must be hard for an honest man like you to work for such corrupt people, Tom?

“Unelected” a problem for you Tom? It certainly is for us out here, I can tell you. I gather the only people ever to have cast a vote for Brown are his constituents. Not you. Not me. Not anyone else.

So what is your problem with “unelected”? Or do you like to have your cake and eat it?

Who elected Mandelson to the cabinet?

Not me? Not you? Yet apparently he represents the country on my behalf.

Some might say bollocks to that.

I would.

Tom, defend your drinking buddies to the death why don’t you.

And shoot to pieces what’s left of your credibility, why don’t you.

Martin was a disgrace – how come everyone can see it but you.

Keep up your present standard and I think (even) the ducklings on here will soon be looking for another mummy duck to paddle behind.

Why don’t you?

I think Tom, most of us would like a general election every 4 years. Not when it suits the prime minister.

We’d also like our cabinet members to be people we have elected. Aren’t there enough people in the Labour party in the Commons to fit these jobs?

But carry on with the Lords, and putting as many people as Brown can in there. It’s all being noted by people like me who once were your supporters, when we thought you were against the aristocracy running the country.