Michael Martin-speaker of the House resigns

[lucky]

I think democracy in our country took a big hit today when Michael Martin was forced to resign. The snobbish witch hunt he has endured is awful. The personal attacks on him by many Tory grandees who could not stomach a working class catholic from Glasgow hold such high office. Yes he has his flaws but for him to carry the can over all MPs expenses is wrong.

I do believe that it is time for an independent look at all expenses and that MP's should be paid a salary in line with their duties as law makers for our country.


How many of us would want their jobs? I don't think I would take it for £63k a year away from your family 4 days a week always in the public spotlight. It is time to get back to real politics and stop this nonsenses over who claimed what.

MAKE SURE YOU VOTE ON 4TH JUNE, STOP THE BNP

[Andy74]

I think democracy in our country took a big hit today when Michael Martin was forced to resign. The snobbish witch hunt he has endured is awful. The personal attacks on him by many Tory grandees who could not stomach a working class catholic from Glasgow hold such high office. Yes he has his flaws but for him to carry the can over all MPs expenses is wrong.

I do believe that it is time for an independent look at all expenses and that MP's should be paid a salary in line with their duties as law makers for our country.


How many of us would want their jobs? I don't think I would take it for £63k a year away from your family 4 days a week always in the public spotlight. It is time to get back to real politics and stop this nonsenses over who claimed what.

MAKE SURE YOU VOTE ON 4TH JUNE, STOP THE BNP

At the end of the day his office was responsible for signing off all these claims. As I've said before it's normal to make most of the expenses afforded to you but it's up the person signing them off to draw the line.

It's a bit like the Bank chiefs, not all their fault personally but they were the ones at the top of the tree in the organisations found to be at fault.

[ancient hibee]

Condsidering he was at the forefront of trying to stop the publication of expenses he had no choice.The idea that he is leaving because of tory toffs is laughable.

[--------]

I think democracy in our country took a big hit today when Michael Martin was forced to resign. The snobbish witch hunt he has endured is awful. The personal attacks on him by many Tory grandees who could not stomach a working class catholic from Glasgow hold such high office. Yes he has his flaws but for him to carry the can over all MPs expenses is wrong.

I do believe that it is time for an independent look at all expenses and that MP's should be paid a salary in line with their duties as law makers for our country.


How many of us would want their jobs? I don't think I would take it for £63k a year away from your family 4 days a week always in the public spotlight. It is time to get back to real politics and stop this nonsenses over who claimed what.

MAKE SURE YOU VOTE ON 4TH JUNE, STOP THE BNP


There are questions about some of his own expenses - that is itself IMO is a sufficient reason for him to go.

He did everything he could last year to make sure MPs would be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act - if he had succeeded none of the evidence for the corruption of Parliament would have come out.

He allowed the Metropolitan Polce to raid Conservative MP Damien Green's Parliamentary office without a warrant last year - one of his duties is to protect the legal rights of MPs, and he failed.

He was more concerned last week to set the police after whoever leaked the information about the expenses frauds than to get an independent inquiry set up to ascertain the extent of the abuse. Never mind the £100,000s of public money that's been stolen - he wanted to jail the mole who told us what was going on.

He has totally failed to grasp the fact that as Speaker he and he alone represents the House of Commons as a political institution apart from the electoral process. He's responsible for the good running of the House, and he's the authority on matters of order and discipline within the House.

The Speaker has to be capable of making moral and ethical judgements that other MPs and the public will respect. Martin can't do that any longer. He HAD to go, and I for one am very glad he's gone, and that has nothing whatsoever to do with snobbery, nor was snobbery the reason for the attack on him yesterday.

The man has been shown to be unfit for the office. END OF. :grr:

[GlesgaeHibby]

Condsidering he was at the forefront of trying to stop the publication of expenses he had no choice.The idea that he is leaving because of tory toffs is laughable.

Exactly. And he hasn't been short of other flaws and controversies during his reign as speaker. The expenses was the final straw. He had to go.

[GhostofBolivar]

I think democracy in our country took a big hit today when Michael Martin was forced to resign. The snobbish witch hunt he has endured is awful. The personal attacks on him by many Tory grandees who could not stomach a working class catholic from Glasgow hold such high office. Yes he has his flaws but for him to carry the can over all MPs expenses is wrong.

I think this is rubbish. There are few institutions in this country as steeped in tradition as the Houses of Parliament. For MPs to break that tradition and force the Speaker out, something must be seriously wrong.

He is responsible for the Fees Office. He is the public face of Parliament. He has handled this fiasco with an appaling lack of awareness, transparancy and honesty. His resignation was an inevitable conclusion to the term of a man who Simon Carr in The Independent - not exactly the flagship of right wing opinion - last week described as:


...an angry, vindictive, manipulative, secretive, power-abusing, Tammany Hall tribalist who has presided over this catastrophic collapse in the reputation of Parliament.

[lucky]

The point I am making is that if it was not for his background do you think the outrage against would have been the same? yes he has made mistakes. But surely the Tories claims for moats and burst pipes on tennis courts are far worse? Then there is the Labour MP's claiming interest on non existent mortgages. As the speaker its very unlikely he new what other MP's are claiming, the fault lies in the system not the administrator of it.

[IndieHibby]

There are questions about some of his own expenses - that is itself IMO is a sufficient reason for him to go.

He did everything he could last year to make sure MPs would be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act - if he had succeeded none of the evidence for the corruption of Parliament would have come out.

He allowed the Metropolitan Polce to raid Conservative MP Damien Green's Parliamentary office without a warrant last year - one of his duties is to protect the legal rights of MPs, and he failed.

He was more concerned last week to set the police after whoever leaked the information about the expenses frauds than to get an independent inquiry set up to ascertain the extent of the abuse. Never mind the £100,000s of public money that's been stolen - he wanted to jail the mole who told us what was going on.

He has totally failed to grasp the fact that as Speaker he and he alone represents the House of Commons as a political institution apart from the electoral process. He's responsible for the good running of the House, and he's the authority on matters of order and discipline within the House.

The Speaker has to be capable of making moral and ethical judgements that other MPs and the public will respect. Martin can't do that any longer. He HAD to go, and I for one am very glad he's gone, and that has nothing whatsoever to do with snobbery, nor was snobbery the reason for the attack on him yesterday.

The man has been shown to be unfit for the office. END OF. :grr:

Hear, hear! That's exactly what I was going to say. Thanks for saving me the time and effort of typing it. :top marks

[ancient hibee]

The point I am making is that if it was not for his background do you think the outrage against would have been the same? yes he has made mistakes. But surely the Tories claims for moats and burst pipes on tennis courts are far worse? Then there is the Labour MP's claiming interest on non existent mortgages. As the speaker its very unlikely he new what other MP's are claiming, the fault lies in the system not the administrator of it.

The reason he is going is because Brown and Cameron hope it will take the heat off MPs because it is an almost unprecedented event-they are wrong because there is a rumour that the Telegraph has got some even juicier stories to come-what is interesting is that MPs have no difficulty in whistling up large amounts of the folding stuff when they decide to pay some back.

[IndieHibby]

The point I am making is that if it was not for his background do you think the outrage against would have been the same? yes he has made mistakes. But surely the Tories claims for moats and burst pipes on tennis courts are far worse? Then there is the Labour MP's claiming interest on non existent mortgages. As the speaker its very unlikely he new what other MP's are claiming, the fault lies in the system not the administrator of it.

I think you are missing the point - it is not about who did the worst expense claims. Martin is supposed to be our (inc. YOU) defence against exactly these kind of abuses. Yet he acted in the opposite way - he tried to block publication of expenses and have the person who leaked the disc jailed. That makes him a nest-feathering parasite in my book.
He also failed in his duty to protect an MP (Damian Green) against the state, which was acting out of vindictive spite in repsonse to embarassing FACTS being released. THEN he tried to blame it on his deputy (three cops have since come out to back her).

Seriously, you are trying to defend this ****** purely because he is a working class Glaswegian. Which, ironically, is kind of what you are accusing the Toffs of.

Please, have a word.

[PC Stamp]

Martin has done the right thing in the circumstances.

What should now happen is that every MP who can be proven to have claimed fraudulently under the expenses fiasco should be forced to do the same.

[GhostofBolivar]

The point I am making is that if it was not for his background do you think the outrage against would have been the same? yes he has made mistakes. But surely the Tories claims for moats and burst pipes on tennis courts are far worse? Then there is the Labour MP's claiming interest on non existent mortgages. As the speaker its very unlikely he new what other MP's are claiming, the fault lies in the system not the administrator of it.

Sorry, what?

Mixu coaches the squad. He targets new signings. He picks the team. They play to his gameplan.

But he's only the administrator, so it's not his fault we're awful...

Fred Goodwin only administered the collapse of RBS, so he should keep his pension...

The fact of the matter is that the speaker is responsible for the integrity of the House. The reputation of Parliament lies broken before us and Martin bears responsibility.

He should have stood up and announced a wide ranging independent inquiry into MP's expenses with the results to be forwarded to the relevant authorities for further - possibly criminal - proceedings where necessary.

He has not done this.

He should have then announced a full review of the way the Fees Office operates.

He has not done this.

Finally, he should have announced a full, independent review of MPs pay and expenses, with the intention of adopting that review's recommendations.

He has not done this.

Instead, he tried to cover the mess up. Then he attacked those who called for greater transparancy. And, eventually, he tried to save himself by making a pathetic semi-apology.

He holds responsibility. He should go. And he's not the only one.

[Andy74]

Sorry, what?

Mixu coaches the squad. He targets new signings. He picks the team. They play to his gameplan.

But he's only the administrator, so it's not his fault we're awful...

Fred Goodwin only administered the collapse of RBS, so he should keep his pension...

The fact of the matter is that the speaker is responsible for the integrity of the House. The reputation of Parliament lies broken before us and Martin bears responsibility.

He should have stood up and announced a wide ranging independent inquiry into MP's expenses with the results to be forwarded to the relevant authorities for further - possibly criminal - proceedings where necessary.

He has not done this.

He should have then announced a full review of the way the Fees Office operates.

He has not done this.

Finally, he should have announced a full, independent review of MPs pay and expenses, with the intention of adopting that review's recommendations.

He has not done this.

Instead, he tried to cover the mess up. Then he attacked those who called for greater transparancy. And, eventually, he tried to save himself by making a pathetic semi-apology.

He holds responsibility. He should go. And he's not the only one.

Has anyone suggested yet that he shouldn't keep his pension? That's the done thing these days isn't it??

[gringojoe]

As long as the MPs reap what they sowed and don't think that by getting rid of the Speaker that this scandal is closed, far from it.

[ancienthibby]

Dodie at 4 got it pretty well spot on.

I would add that there is no way that MM should be the onlu head to roll in this case!

He should be followed by, at least, all those MPs (maybe 6 or so) who (per the DT) have been shown to have defrauded the public by consistently claiming unlawful funds from the taxpayer for payments for mortgages which DO NOT EXIST!! Whether that's 6 or 18 months does not matter - these people are frauds and should be kicked-out by their parties immediately and into the courts!!

They should not be allowed to stand again for any party.

Apparently there has been a husband and wife team of MPs (conservative, I think) who have each claimed for the same mortgage!! The full force of the law of the land should be applied to them immediately.

If these hoped-for resignations were to happen and that triggered a general election...........

...........then...........

bring it on!!!

[Arch Stanton]

Apparently our elected officials were being given insufficient supervision and this was MMs fault.

Mind you if they can't be trusted to fill in expenses claims honestly can we really trust them in any capacity? Being the country's lawmakers springs to mind.

[Jack]

IMO, albeit one of some ignorance as to the actual goings on and looking in from the outside, the man is guilty of not much more than carrying on the long held tradition of abusive expense claims made by MPs who over the decades they themselves have voted for and then rung up all they can claim for.

Many of the MPs have claimed their expenses were within the rules, however outrageous they may seem, what's the problem? What they can claim for has been there for all to see. No one complained … out loud.

Others have claimed fraudulently, but why should the Speakers Office be responsible for that? These MPs are supposed to be trustworthy pillars of the community (:faf: not that I would ever trust them). Paying back the money is irrelevant they have committed a fraud and they should, like him, resign their seat and proper action taken by the Fuzz!

I understand :wink: that FoI has no start date so all previous expense records might now be divulged. Given the uproar of what's happening with the current revelations I suspect the guy was under huge pressure from Ministers and MPs, past and present, rightly or wrongly, to do all in his power to make MPs exempt and to do everything he could to maintain the silence.

If/when FoI releases all this information on expenses the electorate will, I suspect, loose all faith in their democratically elected representatives’ and the Mother of all Parliaments will be in very, very serious trouble.

Is it right or is it wrong? :blah:

Personally I’m past caring. I can think of very few, if any, currently elected reprehensibles who are not in it for their own benefit and the fact they are cheating the system doesn’t surprise me in the slightest.



Many, many years ago (so you can multiply these figures by about 2 then 2 again, I was earning around £3,000 at the time as a lowly clerk, minimum wage and a wee bit type stuff) there was a Labour Party meeting in Shandon or there abouts. A proposal was put from the floor that anyone earning £7,500 should donate the rest to the Party. A councillor stood up and suggested it should be double that, £15,000. The local MP stood up and made excuses then suggested £20,000. A wee guy at the back got up and said that if he was earning £20,000 he’d join the ******* Tory Party. :faf:

Like I said they're all in it for themselves. Lord :jamboak:is just a typical example.

[lucky]

Being in a minority on this does not believe to think that it has not been anything other than a witch hunt. this is a man who has represented working people all his life. He was a trade union activist then councillor then an MP for 30 years. He is the fall guy in all of this and its wrong. Each mp who wrongly claimed expenses should pay for it not MM

[ancienthibby]

Being in a minority on this does not believe to think that it has not been anything other than a witch hunt. this is a man who has represented working people all his life. He was a trade union activist then councillor then an MP for 30 years. He is the fall guy in all of this and its wrong. Each mp who wrongly claimed expenses should pay for it not MM

There are many people claiming that MM is a man of integrity - and that aspect of his life may well be completely true.

However, he and he alone, has proved that,in this matter at least, he has been found to be incompetent, - and THAT is why HE knows his time has come!

[Arch Stanton]

There are many people claiming that MM is a man of integrity - and that aspect of his life may well be completely true.

However, he and he alone, has proved that,in this matter at least, he has been found to be incompetent, - and THAT is why HE knows his time has come!

What? Are you really saying that things changed in the speaker's office after MM took over from Betty Boothroyd?

On what basis? That it is a facile thing to suggest or is there any evidence?

And was he the only one who knew about all this?

Really??

Was he?????

[Nakedmanoncrack]

The snobbish witch hunt he has endured is awful. The personal attacks on him by many Tory grandees who could not stomach a working class catholic from Glasgow hold such high office.

To be fair though I've no sympathy for him, he is being made a scapegoat by MPs who hope that by turning the attention on him they will escape blame. However the idea that being a Catholic has contribute to his demise belongs on the more extreme chip-on the shoulder, deluded Celtic forums. How many people even knew his religion?

[lucky]

To be fair though I've no sympathy for him, he is being made a scapegoat by MPs who hope that by turning the attention on him they will escape blame. However the idea that being a Catholic has contribute to his demise belongs on the more extreme chip-on the shoulder, deluded Celtic forums. How many people even knew his religion?

It is commonly known that MM is a catholic, he is the first catholic to hold the post as such there are many in the establishment who are against him

[Killiehibbie]

His example should be followed by a few hundred MPs then the greedy robbing *******s should be jailed.

[Beefster]

The personal attacks on him by many Tory grandees who could not stomach a working class catholic from Glasgow hold such high office.

What about the Labour and Lib Dems who have criticised him and signed the motion for a vote of no confidence? All bigotted snobs?

If a upper middle class Tory had done the same job as Martin, you would be defending him as strongly?


It is commonly known that MM is a catholic, he is the first catholic to hold the post as such there are many in the establishment who are against him

I'm a Catholic and I was of the impression that he had to go.

He was a poor Speaker who was at the forefront of attempts to block the public being able to apply Freedom of Information to Parliament. This while being driven, at our expense, to Celtic games, flying his family around the world at our expense and racking up £4k worth of taxi bills for his wife to do her shopping.

Nothing to do with being working class. Or Catholic. Or Scottish.

[Richard Scott]

Good. Gordon Brown next please.

[ancienthibby]

What? Are you really saying that things changed in the speaker's office after MM took over from Betty Boothroyd?

On what basis? That it is a facile thing to suggest or is there any evidence?

And was he the only one who knew about all this?

Really??

Was he?????

You've got your Betty Boothroyd nickers in a bit of a twist there, Crabit One!!

All of the MM issues pertain to post 2004, and as made public by the DT. So what went on in the BB era is not of relevance.

MM has been reported to be the 'CEO of the Commons' and, as such in charge of 650 or so employees. Any CEO who acted in the same manner would now be on the dole-queue, in the scrap-heap!

And what happens to MM?? Why he'll only be elevated to the Lords at the meagre reward of £569 per day in 'fees'!!

[Arch Stanton]

Nothing to do with being working class. Or Catholic. Or Scottish.

Really? I'm struggling to see what your bias is then.

"What about the Labour and Lib Dems who have criticised him and signed the motion for a vote of no confidence? All bigotted snobs?"
What then? Working class comprehensive types? Get real!!

"If a upper middle class Tory had done the same job as Martin, you would be defending him as strongly?"

I'd actually want to know what he had done - seems fair enough to me. You may believe that the only changes in the House of Commons over the past 100 years have been the introduction of TV/Radio and the introduction of the honour system for expenses by MM - I would actually want to know the facts!

"He was a poor Speaker who was at the forefront of attempts to block the public being able to apply Freedom of Information to Parliament. This while being driven, at our expense, to Celtic games, flying his family around the world at our expense and racking up £4k worth of taxi bills for his wife to do her shopping."

Oh come on - get off your soap box. Parliament beats the Masonic Lodge hands down for arcane practices - trying to make out that MM has changed things for the worse is just stupid in my view. I mean to say, traveling to Celtic games??

He has even been slated in the press for the money he spent on his official residence (i.e. not his!!) most of which was accounted for my improvements to security!

[Phil D. Rolls]

If Wee Eck saw Martin's supporters on the news tonight he must be creaming himself. Talk about dinosaurs, this lot were amoebas. The worst of old labour playing the anti scottish card.

Wee note to them. Not every jock in London gets "Gorbals" as part of his nick name. So, if the cap fits...

[Arch Stanton]

If Wee Eck saw Martin's supporters on the news tonight he must be creaming himself. Talk about dinosaurs, this lot were amoebas. The worst of old labour playing the anti scottish card.

Wee note to them. Not every jock in London gets "Gorbals" as part of his nick name. So, if the cap fits...

Eh?

I can only guess as to the prejudices behind this post, but if you could just articulate them explicitly then I can see myself having an interest in replying. I could also see myself being completely disinterested on the other hand.

[Beefster]

Really? I'm struggling to see what your bias is then.

"What about the Labour and Lib Dems who have criticised him and signed the motion for a vote of no confidence? All bigotted snobs?"
What then? Working class comprehensive types? Get real!!

"If a upper middle class Tory had done the same job as Martin, you would be defending him as strongly?"

I'd actually want to know what he had done - seems fair enough to me. You may believe that the only changes in the House of Commons over the past 100 years have been the introduction of TV/Radio and the introduction of the honour system for expenses by MM - I would actually want to know the facts!

"He was a poor Speaker who was at the forefront of attempts to block the public being able to apply Freedom of Information to Parliament. This while being driven, at our expense, to Celtic games, flying his family around the world at our expense and racking up £4k worth of taxi bills for his wife to do her shopping."

Oh come on - get off your soap box. Parliament beats the Masonic Lodge hands down for arcane practices - trying to make out that MM has changed things for the worse is just stupid in my view. I mean to say, traveling to Celtic games??

He has even been slated in the press for the money he spent on his official residence (i.e. not his!!) most of which was accounted for my improvements to security!

You're suggesting that no Tories or Lib Dems come from working class backgrounds (and probably that there are no upper middle class Labour MPs). Who is applying stereotypes here?

I never once said that Martin had changed things for the worse. I said that he had attempted to get Parliament exempted from the Freedom of Information Act.

As for his official residence, he gets a grace and favour home in London (I've no problem with that - it's an important position) but then claims £45,000 for his home in Glasgow too. So is the taxpayer paying for both his homes any better than a random MP 'flipping'?

PS I'd prefer it if you tried to debate without resorting to patronising me. Despite being half your age, I probably know more about Parliament than you realise. Not everyone who disagrees with your opinions (I'm guessing that you're a lifelong Labour supporter and their current implosion is just killing you) has an agenda or is prejudiced.

[lucky]

Whilst MM tried to defend the status quo at the HoC (that is his job) He was then turn on by mainly Tory and Lib Dems attempting to score political points against Brown. However the speakers position is non party political and as such he deserved more respect. I do believe terms like like Gorbals Mick are slant on his upbringing and therefore an attack on all working class who have worked hard to achieve a position of status and power.

[Arch Stanton]

You're suggesting that no Tories or Lib Dems come from working class backgrounds (and probably that there are no upper middle class Labour MPs). Who is applying stereotypes here?

I never once said that Martin had changed things for the worse. I said that he had attempted to get Parliament exempted from the Freedom of Information Act.

As for his official residence, he gets a grace and favour home in London (I've no problem with that - it's an important position) but then claims £45,000 for his home in Glasgow too. So is the taxpayer paying for both his homes any better than a random MP 'flipping'?

PS I'd prefer it if you tried to debate without resorting to patronising me. Despite being half your age, I probably know more about Parliament than you realise. Not everyone who disagrees with your opinions (I'm guessing that you're a lifelong Labour supporter and their current implosion is just killing you) has an agenda or is prejudiced.

If you stick to decent arguments then I won't patronise you. If you really think that working class people have any truck with these attacks on MM then fine. If you fail to make decent concrete arguments then you are very very thin ground as far as I am concerned. I am NOT a lifelong labour supporter - that doesn't mean I won't spring to the defense of a decent labourite in the face of such attacks.

It was the House of Commons Commission which attempted to get Parliament exempted from the Freedom of Information Act - chairmen only vote in the event of a tied decision. Your assertion that it was down to MM is an over zealous attempt to blame him I would suggest!

MPs have always had to upkeep a constinuency home - if that is a crime then there must be tens of thousands that have committed it.

[steakbake]

Whilst MM tried to defend the status quo at the HoC (that is his job) He was then turn on by mainly Tory and Lib Dems attempting to score political points against Brown. However the speakers position is non party political and as such he deserved more respect. I do believe terms like like Gorbals Mick are slant on his upbringing and therefore an attack on all working class who have worked hard to achieve a position of status and power.

Who are the "working class" in 21st Century Britain?

This is what I don't get about the archane rhetoric thrown about by Labour's left wing. They bemoan a perceived class system, yet they are the very ones who identify and bracket people according to their class, ruling them as adequate or inadequate for public service based on their ideas of who these people are.

Martin was elected to the position in the first place, regardless of his class or upbringing and held on to it for 8-9 years. I'd say from that point of view, his class (or perceptions of it) have not held him back or contributed to his downfall in any way.

He had to go. He is, if you like, as a Chief Exec of a big company. Said company is now found to be fairly rotten to the core. He oversaw the fees office as well as the expenses system at large. He is also guilty in the court of public opinion (I knew that would bite Jacqui Smith on the erse one day) of mismanaging his office and not recognising what to do when the proverbial hit the fan.

He would rather blame others, than see what has gone wrong on his watch. As for angling for his son to take over as candidate in his constituency, we'll see what happens there, but it is an example of the fact that Scottish Labour see Scotland as some kind of fiefdom to suit their own personal gain.

There is good and bad in every party, but I think 12 years of Labour in a commanding position in Westminster has gone to their collective heads. As much as a Tory government would be distinctly worse, I'd like to think that Labour will use their time wisely in opposition when it comes, to consider where things have gone wrong and perhaps come back with a bit more humility to try to reconnect with the very "working class" they claim they represent.

[cabbageandribs1875]

I think democracy in our country took a big hit today when Michael Martin was forced to resign.



a horrible horrible little diddler :thumbsup: it was very nice of him to invite the police to make enquiries though, albeit he only wanted the police to catch the informant letting the press know who the fiddlers were and NOT because of any wrong doing's by MP's :agree: delighted this freeloader is finally standing down:thumbsup: oh and P.S. anyone that thinks this has anything whatsoever to do with race must seriously be struggling for a reason to defend that hypocritical t*sser GOOD RIDDANCE:bye:




please please please let the worst chancellor of the exchequer GB has ever had(the un-elected PM....Mr stealth tax himself) be next to go :thumbsup:

[Arch Stanton]

a horrible horrible little diddler :thumbsup: it was very nice of him to invite the police to make enquiries though, albeit he only wanted the police to catch the informant letting the press know who the fiddlers were and NOT because of any wrong doing's by MP's :agree: delighted this freeloader is finally standing down:thumbsup: oh and P.S. anyone that thinks this has anything whatsoever to do with race must seriously be struggling for a reason to defend that hypocritical t*sser GOOD RIDDANCE:bye:

Something I've noticed over the years - just because someone is a Hibby doesn't mean they aren't ignorant sh**tes.

BTW - Since MM isn't on here to answer for himself I've decided to answer for him!

[ArabHibee]

To be fair though I've no sympathy for him, he is being made a scapegoat by MPs who hope that by turning the attention on him they will escape blame. However the idea that being a Catholic has contribute to his demise belongs on the more extreme chip-on the shoulder, deluded Celtic forums. How many people even knew his religion?
:top marks
Don't really see what this has to do with his demise?

[Arch Stanton]

Who are the "working class" in 21st Century Britain?

This is what I don't get about the archane rhetoric thrown about by Labour's left wing. They bemoan a perceived class system, yet they are the very ones who identify and bracket people according to their class, ruling them as adequate or inadequate for public service based on their ideas of who these people are.

Martin was elected to the position in the first place, regardless of his class or upbringing and held on to it for 8-9 years. I'd say from that point of view, his class (or perceptions of it) have not held him back or contributed to his downfall in any way.

He had to go. He is, if you like, as a Chief Exec of a big company. Said company is now found to be fairly rotten to the core. He oversaw the fees office as well as the expenses system at large. He is also guilty in the court of public opinion (I knew that would bite Jacqui Smith on the erse one day) of mismanaging his office and not recognising what to do when the proverbial hit the fan.

He would rather blame others, than see what has gone wrong on his watch. As for angling for his son to take over as candidate in his constituency, we'll see what happens there, but it is an example of the fact that Scottish Labour see Scotland as some kind of fiefdom to suit their own personal gain.

There is good and bad in every party, but I think 12 years of Labour in a commanding position in Westminster has gone to their collective heads. As much as a Tory government would be distinctly worse, I'd like to think that Labour will use their time wisely in opposition when it comes, to consider where things have gone wrong and perhaps come back with a bit more humility to try to reconnect with the very "working class" they claim they represent.

Hilarious or what?

I could make the same argument, word for word, about the Queen resigning HER job!

[Phil D. Rolls]

Eh?

I can only guess as to the prejudices behind this post, but if you could just articulate them explicitly then I can see myself having an interest in replying. I could also see myself being completely disinterested on the other hand.

Articulate explicitly? I can only try.

Martin's supporters are claiming he is the victim of anti scottishness. His nickname was Gorbals Mick. Some of them were on the news tonight claiming it was deeply offensive to call someone Gorbals (take it none of them are MPs for that part of Glasgow.

My point is that the name Gorbals isn't an anti-Scottish thing as such. I reckon it is aimed at the sort of inverted snob who excuses his incompetency by playing the salt of the earth card. "I'm from humble roots"; "where I come from we've got a way of dealing with that" etc etc.

There are other scots who work in London, who don't get called Gorbals. Maybe that's because they don't make a big play on where they come from, rather on what they can do.

Martin is incompetent and has been so for some time. His handling of the whole expenses thing with his jeering at those who opposed him showed that he was far out of his depth.

His supporters with their reliance on emotional rhetoric, showed how far out of touch they were with the modern working man.

Hope that clarifies things for you.

[Beefster]

MM tried to defend the status quo at the HoC (that is his job)

No, it isn't.


MPs have always had to upkeep a constinuency home - if that is a crime then there must be tens of thousands that have committed it.

The ACA is designed to pay for one of the constituency or Westminster properties. If you have a grace and favour property then you don't have any expense for maintaining a second home. The fact that a fair number of MPs have been taking advantage of the system doesn't make Michael Martin any less immoral.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Something I've noticed over the years - just because someone is a Hibby doesn't mean they aren't ignorant sh**tes.

BTW - Since MM isn't on here to answer for himself I've decided to answer for him!


Au contaire:bye: save your abuse for someone who actually cares amigo :violin:

[Arch Stanton]

Articulate explicitly? I can only try.

Martin's supporters are claiming he is the victim of anti scottishness. His nickname was Gorbals Mick. Some of them were on the news tonight claiming it was deeply offensive to call someone Gorbals (take it none of them are MPs for that part of Glasgow.

My point is that the name Gorbals isn't an anti-Scottish thing as such. I reckon it is aimed at the sort of inverted snob who excuses his incompetency by playing the salt of the earth card. "I'm from humble roots"; "where I come from we've got a way of dealing with that" etc etc.

There are other scots who work in London, who don't get called Gorbals. Maybe that's because they don't make a big play on where they come from, rather on what they can do.

Martin is incompetent and has been so for some time. His handling of the whole expenses thing with his jeering at those who opposed him showed that he was far out of his depth.

His supporters with their reliance on emotional rhetoric, showed how far out of touch they were with the modern working man.

Hope that clarifies things for you.

And would modern working man be someone who walks backward wearing a pair of black tights?:faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Something I've noticed over the years - just because someone is a Hibby doesn't mean they aren't ignorant sh**tes.

BTW - Since MM isn't on here to answer for himself I've decided to answer for him!

You are "The Cat" and I claim £5.00.

[Arch Stanton]

No, it isn't.

The ACA is designed to pay for one of the constituency or Westminster properties. If you have a grace and favour property then you don't have any expense for maintaining a second home. The fact that a fair number of MPs have been taking advantage of the system doesn't make Michael Martin any less immoral.


If the rules say you aren't given an expense for a second property then fair enough, but the rules are not in a position to say that you do not HAVE any expenses for it - at the very least there are insurance implications of maintaining an empty property over and above a property that is lived in - not insignificant ones at that.

While Michael Martin is certainly no less immoral that any other MP who has ever been, I have seen no good reason for him to be judged any more immoral that any other MP, past or present - maybe you haven't quite got round to making that point yet?

[steakbake]

Hilarious or what?

I could make the same argument, word for word, about the Queen resigning HER job!

This has nothing to do with the queen, so I don't really get your point.

[Arch Stanton]

This has nothing to do with the queen, so I don't really get your point.

No - I guess you don't at that.

And it isn't anything to do with Tony Blair either apparently - the fact he was in charge of the country doesn't mean he should carry any blame - which certainly belies any Scottish Catholic bias for sure. Maybe he was unaware of the fact his subordinates were cheating the system - do you think?

But Michael Martin must carry some blame for the fact that MPs expenses have never been subject to 'freedom of information' and they still aren't subject to 'freedom of information'.

What I wonder is - did ANY mp know that such cheating was going on? If so, why didn't they make the fact known?

[steakbake]

No - I guess you don't at that.

And it isn't anything to do with Tony Blair either apparently - the fact he was in charge of the country doesn't mean he should carry any blame - which certainly belies any Scottish Catholic bias for sure. Maybe he was unaware of the fact his subordinates were cheating the system - do you think?

But Michael Martin must carry some blame for the fact that MPs expenses have never been subject to 'freedom of information' and they still aren't subject to 'freedom of information'.

What I wonder is - did ANY mp know that such cheating was going on? If so, why didn't they make the fact known?

Well, our Tone. He's got bigger things on his consciousness to wrestle with. Why worry about conning the tax payer out of money for swimming pools and dry rot, when you have the deaths of at least 500,000 people on your shoulders?

[Beefster]

If the rules say you aren't given an expense for a second property then fair enough, but the rules are not in a position to say that you do not HAVE any expenses for it - at the very least there are insurance implications of maintaining an empty property over and above a property that is lived in - not insignificant ones at that.

While Michael Martin is certainly no less immoral that any other MP who has ever been, I have seen no good reason for him to be judged any more immoral that any other MP, past or present - maybe you haven't quite got round to making that point yet?

£45,000+ worth of expenses? Let's not kid ourselves, this isn't little things like contents insurance.

I'm not saying that he's any worse or more immoral than the others who were 'pushing the boundaries', I'm making the point that he needed to go. The fact remains that he's effectively the Chief Executive/Chairman of the Parliament so is ultimately responsible for the current crisis. Just like the Chairmen and Chief Execs of RBS and HBOS took ultimate responsibility for their companies.

Rest assured though that there will be more MPs who lose their job as a result of their actions - be they Labour, Conservative, Lib Dems or whatever - and the party leaders are promising as much, even before the electorate get their hands on the culprits. In fact, you could say that, considering that Michael Martin will probably walk away with a peerage, he'll probably be better off than most of the rest.

[lucky]

No, it isn't.



The ACA is designed to pay for one of the constituency or Westminster properties. If you have a grace and favour property then you don't have any expense for maintaining a second home. The fact that a fair number of MPs have been taking advantage of the system doesn't make Michael Martin any less immoral.

MM job is defend the HoC's the only steer any speaker ever gets is on how the house votes. As such he was following the way of the house. For those who think that bringing down a Labour government is going to lead us all to Utopia and solve all our problems are sadly mistaken. The Tories will turn on the people and defend big business and Wee Eck may lead us to the promised land just like Ireland and Iceland. Times are hard just now but in the last recession interest rates peaked at 15% not the 0.5% they are now. This country can not afford another 10 years + of a Tory government

[Beefster]

This country can not afford another 10 years + of a Tory government

Considering the rocketing unemployment along with unprecedented national and personal debt after 12 years of a Labour Government, I'd probably advise leaving that line out of the election campaigning.

[Arch Stanton]

£45,000+ worth of expenses? Let's not kid ourselves, this isn't little things like contents insurance.

I'm not saying that he's any worse or more immoral than the others who were 'pushing the boundaries', I'm making the point that he needed to go. The fact remains that he's effectively the Chief Executive/Chairman of the Parliament so is ultimately responsible for the current crisis. Just like the Chairmen and Chief Execs of RBS and HBOS took ultimate responsibility for their companies.

Rest assured though that there will be more MPs who lose their job as a result of their actions - be they Labour, Conservative, Lib Dems or whatever - and the party leaders are promising as much, even before the electorate get their hands on the culprits. In fact, you could say that, considering that Michael Martin will probably walk away with a peerage, he'll probably be better off than most of the rest.

OK - just because people have been gleefully dredging up mud to sling at MM I guess it does not follow that the issue of his 2nd house expenses isn't a resigning issue. The point is I am not arguing that he should have kept his job but rather that the HoC should be shouldering collective responsibility for all this. The problem is clearly an institutional one which requires an institutional fix.

And honestly, do you really have an expectation that the next speaker will have a proven track record as a chief executive? I know I don't. (I heard on the radio that Anne Widdecombe would have been a favourite if she wasn't standing down as an MP) :brickwall:brickwall

Furthermore, this is all happening because of revelations in the Daily Telegraph, but who here believes that our MPs were told anything they didn't already know? They got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and are using MM as a scapegoat.

BTW I hope MM doesn't get a peerage as I really couldn't be doing with the resultant shock indignant rage horror headlines in the Tory press.

[Steve-O]

How can Martin be considered "working class" by the OP? :confused:

63 grand a year (plus expenses :wink:) and limos to Parkheid every other week?? Working class :faf:

[New Corrie]

I think democracy in our country took a big hit today when Michael Martin was forced to resign. The snobbish witch hunt he has endured is awful. The personal attacks on him by many Tory grandees who could not stomach a working class catholic from Glasgow hold such high office. Yes he has his flaws but for him to carry the can over all MPs expenses is wrong.

I do believe that it is time for an independent look at all expenses and that MP's should be paid a salary in line with their duties as law makers for our country.


How many of us would want their jobs? I don't think I would take it for £63k a year away from your family 4 days a week always in the public spotlight. It is time to get back to real politics and stop this nonsenses over who claimed what.

MAKE SURE YOU VOTE ON 4TH JUNE, STOP THE BNP

What typical paranoid bollocks.

To think I get accused of talking pish. Is there a chance that it might be because he was a crap speaker and made a pig's ear of it.

Oh! And I will be voting on the 4th of June, and it wont be for a party that even remotely thinks that there's some sort of witchunt against Working class Catholics.

[lucky]

What typical paranoid bollocks.

To think I get accused of talking pish. Is there a chance that it might be because he was a crap speaker and made a pig's ear of it.

Oh! And I will be voting on the 4th of June, and it wont be for a party that even remotely thinks that there's some sort of witchunt against Working class Catholics.

you get accused of talking crap because you have proven history of supporting Thatcher and her policies. I would expect nothing less of a sycophant of the Tory party

[New Corrie]

you get accused of talking crap because you have proven history of supporting Thatcher and her policies. I would expect nothing less of a sycophant of the Tory party


I think you'll find I wasn't alone given that she was PM for quite some time.

You just stick to your paranoid conspiracy theories.

[lucky]

I think you'll find I wasn't alone given that she was PM for quite some time.

You just stick to your paranoid conspiracy theories.

Yet not many in this part of the UK. I cant believe even with hindsight you would defend that woman

[ancient hibee]

How can Martin be considered "working class" by the OP? :confused:

63 grand a year (plus expenses :wink:) and limos to Parkheid every other week?? Working class :faf:


Actually £160K plus expenses and a £1.5Million pension pot.

Incidentally most of these expenses now being claimed have only been on the go for about 12 years.

[New Corrie]

Yet not many in this part of the UK. I cant believe even with hindsight you would defend that woman


Which part of the UK? Edinburgh West/Central/Pentlands and South were all Conservative seats during her tenure. What on earth are you talking about?