There'll always be an England

It has always irritated me that whilst Scotland & Wales have their own 'anthems' England does not, leading to the situation where English athletes at the Commonwealth games as well as footballers and Rugby players at World Cups receive medals or line up to God Save the Queen. God Save the Queen is the UK national anthem and I think that England using it as well cannot help but make the other parts of the United Kingdom think they are merely appendages to England (albeit that they are). I have long thought that England should have its own anthem, I would choose Land of Hope and Glory as that is good and rousing but I would be almost as happy with Jerusalem which will this year be England's anthem at the Commonwealth Games in Delhi.

So I was interested to hear that Greg Mulholland the Lib Dem MP for Leeds North West raised the matter in the House of Commons today:

'All the English Members of the House thoroughly enjoyed England's qualification yesterday, and it was wonderful to see the cross of St George flying. However, it is still frustrating to hear England singing the wrong anthem-the anthem of the United Kingdom. Following the historic decision to use "Jerusalem" at the Commonwealth games, may we have a debate in the House about properly establishing an English national anthem for when England, as opposed to the United Kingdom, compete?'

Sir George Young's reply was probably wrong as well as evasive (my comments in italics): 'I am sure that England's victory yesterday was celebrated not just in England but in Scotland and Wales.' I think that in many parts of Scotland and almost as many in Wales the hatred of the English is stronger than Unionists choose to believe

Two fine examples of not answering the question

From today's proceedings of the House of Commons:

"Mr. Baron: Will the Minister address this matter seriously and urgently? Answers to written questions show that between 1997 and 2000, for each page of primary legislation, there were 14 minutes of debating time on the Floor of the House. In the three Sessions ending in 2006, that figure had halved to seven minutes. We need either to increase the amount of time we have to scrutinise legislation, or to introduce less but better legislation.

Barbara Keeley: Averages are perhaps not the best way to look at this matter. I looked at recent Bill Committees, including the Equality Bill. It had six hours of debate on Second Reading, seven hours of evidence taking and 38 hours of scrutiny sessions in Committee—a total of 51 hours—and it will have further time on Report. Before that, there was extensive written consultation, which brought in 4,000 responses. It is an excellent Bill, and there has been a great deal of scrutiny."

"Averages are perhaps not the best way to look at this matter." but they are more informative than bare total time figures.


From later in the same document:

"Sir George Young:... When will the Chancellor present his pre-Budget report? In 2007, it was on 9 October. When he does so, will he be as open with the public about the tough decisions that lie ahead of us on public spending as my party was at our conference last week, and will he confirm that there will be 9 per cent. cuts in departmental cash limits as recently revealed? Can the Leader of the House also give an indication of when the parliamentary calendar for next year will be published? The arrangements around Easter will be of more than usual interest.

Ms Harman:... The right hon. Gentleman asked, too, about public spending, and there will be a debate on the economy next week. No doubt, the Economic Ministers leading for the Government in that debate will make it clear that, although there are encouraging signs of recovery, the economy remains fragile, and that although the recession is abating, we are not yet out of the woods. To pull the plugs, therefore, on important capital investment and support for people who become unemployed will not, I am sure, be part of the agenda to be set out next Monday."

And answer came there none. One might be forgiven for thinking that the Labour government were putting off the pre-Budget report for as long as possible...

The Speaker election

First round results:
Stay in:
John Bercow 179
Sir George Young 112
Margaret Beckett 74
Sir Alan Haselhurst 66
Sir Alan Beith 55
Anne Widdecombe 44

Probably Drop out as less than 5%:
Parmjit Dhanda 26
Richard Shepherd 15
Sir Patrick Cormack 13
Sir Michael Lord 9

No huge surprises in the order but Margaret Beckett seems to have received fewer votes than I expected and Sir George Young more. John Bercow got 30% of the vote and unless there is a tactical switch by Margaret Beckett's supporters at an early stage to prevent Sir George Young winning then I expect Sir Alan Beith and Anne Widdecombe to drop out next. If Margaret Beckett's supporters do work this tactical switch then John Bercow would have 42% add in 20 or so from those who dropped out and he's at 46%, so at least one more round looks necessary.

Now who will get the four dropped out candidates votes? I would imagine that a high proportion of Sir Michael Lord and Sir Patrick Cormack's votes will move to Sir Alan Haselhurst or Sir George Young. Ricahrd Shepherd's supporters are harder to predict as are Parmjit Dhanda's.

When Sir Alan Beith and Anne Widdecombe drop out I expect Sir George Young to pick up more votes than Margaret Beckett or John Bercow.

The next Speaker of the House of Commons

Now that Michael Martin has finally noticed that he is about as popular as his mate Gordon Brown and announced his resignation for just over a month's time, the race is on the be the new Speaker. What could be finer than luxurious Westminster apartments, a large entertainment budget and lots of foreign jaunts.

Already the just about Conservative MP, John Bercow, who seems to have spent much of the last few years buttering up Labour MPs, possibly for just this opportunity, looks like jumping into the fray and the BBC seem like they might look favourably upon him. He would meet the "fairness" doctrine of being a Conservative but so loosely that the Labour/BBC alliance could support him.

Other possible candidates include Sir Alan Haselhurst, one of the deputy Speakers, who the BBC carefully talk down in their "Speaker: Runners and riders". In fact the whole BBC list is a fine example of how the BBC try and set the agenda, so here it is with my comments:

"ALAN BEITH - CONFIRMED CANDIDATE

Veteran Lib Dem MP, with more than 30 years experience. Former party leadership contender. Chairman of the constitutional affairs committee. Respected figure who was in the running for the job in 2000. Has told his local newspaper, the Newcastle Journal, he plans to stand again this time: "This is a crucial time for the House of Commons and if I have enough support across the parties, I am willing to take on the task of leading reform as Speaker. But it is a matter for the House to decide.""
Lib Dem and therefore preferable, in the BBC's mind, to a Tory


SIR GEORGE YOUNG - YET TO CONFIRM

Conservative grandee and widely-respected chairman of the Standards and Privileges Committee. One of the bookmakers' favourites to land the job of Speaker after missing out in 2000. But Eton-educated background may count against him in the eyes of Labour MPs. Ladbrokes make him 8/1.
After all the "class war" accusations made by and on behalf of Michael Martin, the BBC have to try and start another one. I presume if the BBC can get it out there that having gone to Eton disbars one from becoming Speaker then maybe they could do the same for putative Prime Ministers. Is there a Labour equivalent of "Conservative Grandee"? There must be a phrase to describe the sort of long-serving Labour MP who is part of the Labour establishment...


SIR ALAN HASELHURST -YET TO CONFIRM

Conservative MP and deputy speaker. Widely-respected figure who also served as deputy to former Speaker Betty Boothroyd. Another favourite at the bookmakers but being singled out by The Daily Telegraph for claiming £142,119 in second homes allowances since 2001, despite having no mortgage on the property, will not help his chances. Joint favourite at 4/1 with Frank Field, according to Ladbrokes.
"Widely-respected" at the moment but let's see if the BBC can change that with mention of his expenses.


SIR MENZIES CAMPBELL - YET TO CONFIRM

Former Liberal Democrat leader. Respected for his integrity on all sides of the house and was one of the favourites to land the job last time. But chances may be hampered by criticism of his second home allowance claim.
A real BBC favourite and not a Tory... Odd how Alan Hazelhursts second home allowance figure is detailed but Sir Menzies' is just alluded to.


FRANK FIELD -YET TO CONFIRM

Maverick former Labour minister who sometimes seem more respected on Opposition side of the house - which may count against him if he decides to run. Led successful campaign to reverse 10p tax band cut. Has also led calls for wholesale reform of the Commons.
Nice choice of words here; "maverick" I presume because he did "think the unthinkable" and not back down. I also like the fact that the sucessful candidate must be acceptable to Labour which seems to mean be a loyal Labour MP, do the BBC understand the history of the Speaker's role?


JOHN BERCOW - YET TO CONFIRM

Backbench Tory MP. Former right winger, who has moved towards the centre in recent years. Thought to have the backing of several Labour MPs for the Speaker's job but may not be popular enough with his own side to stand a realistic chance. Ladbrokes have him at 8/1.
"Moved towards the centre", surely moved right through the centre and heading left. No mention of Jhn Bercow's expenses, why?


SIR PATRICK CORMACK -YET TO CONFIRM

Veteran Tory backbencher who was in the running for the job last time. Chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. Expert on constitutional affairs but may be seen as too much of a traditionalist to lead changes demanded by most MPs.
I wouldn't disagree but again a Conservative MP with negative points.


CHRIS MULLIN - YET TO CONFIRM

Former Labour minister and diarist, with an independent-minded streak. Standing down at the next election but has been talked of as a possible interim candidate for Speaker, who might gain the necessary cross-party support.
An interesting choice, again positively spoken of as he is a Labour MP.


TONY WRIGHT - YET TO CONFIRM

Widely-respected chairman of the public administration committee, who has led a number of investigations into the conduct of MPs and civil servants. Has been talked of by some as a possible contender from the Labour benches.
More positive coverage of a Labour candidate.


VINCE CABLE -YET TO CONFIRM

Well-known figure with the public who would also be respected on all sides of the house. May wish to stick with the Lib Dem Treasury brief with which he has made his name.
The BBC's favourite economics expert, often the only opposition MP allowed to voice his opinions on the BBC. The BBC would be loathe to lose him as then they might have to interview a Tory.


SYLVIA HEAL - YET TO CONFIRM

Labour MP and deputy speaker. Sister of Labour MP Ann Keen, who organised Michael Martin's successful campaign for the Speakership in 2000.
No mention of Ann Keen's troughing exploits?


RICHARD SHEPHERD - YET TO CONFIRM

Independent-minded veteran Tory MP, first elected in 1979. Has led criticism of Speaker Martin. Stood unsuccessfully for the Speakership in October 2000. Ladbrokes makes him 14/1.
I think the BBC are unsure about this one as this one is in note form, maybe still waiting for No 10's steer.


ANN WIDDECOMBE - RULED HERSELF OUT

The former shadow home secretary is one of Parliament's best-known and most respected figures. Has said she is definitely standing down at the next general election and appeared to pour cold water on the idea of doing the Speaker's job on an interim basis in a BBC interview, after allies on the Tory benches talked up her chances of landing it.
The BBC don't agree with much of Ann Widecombe's views and would hate to see her as Speaker, hence the talking down of the chances of her standing as an interim candidate. Of course an interim candidate is the Labour/BBC's nightmare scenario as that means that the new Parliament, a Parliament likely to have a large Conservative majority, might elect as Speaker someone who the opposition benches might think unsuitable, rather as the 1997 Labour Party did. This is not how the Speaker should be elected but by deviating from the convention of alternating Speakers (in 1997) the Labour party have likely brought this into happening.