The Speaker to quit?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-118346 3/Michael-Martin-quit-Election-install-son-her editary-seat-claim-100-000-golden-parachute.ht ml

Do you think that Martin's promise to step down at the next election will save him from a vote of no confidence?

It seems obvious he wants to take the easy way out thus maximising his benefits, if he can last out to the election.

[andy-hughes]

I think one of the main issues the electorate has with its MP's over the expenses fiasco is their wilful refusal to accept the moral responsibility of their actions, instead bleating that they acted 'within the rules'. As the oft used phrase has it - "Free speech does not entitle you to shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre."

Since is is finally, and reluactnatly dawning on the Honourable Members that the public is not simply going to do as it's told and mind its own business, they had better get off their collective backsides and be seen to do something.

Removwl of Martin would send the message that MP's acknowledge his disgraceful and immoral complicity in the whole affair, and that they intend to get their House in orer, albeit very slowly and reluctantly.

Apart from his role in this affair, Speaker Martin has proved himself unsuitable for his role, being arrongant, rude, vain, insulting, duplicitous, mealy-mouthed, and downright useless at his job. Thus, voting him out will enable MP's to enjoy the double whammy of looking tough and righteous, as well as shifting the pompous oaf out of his powerful position.

Speaker Martin should learn the lessons Margaret Thatcher failed to heed - listen to your colleagues, be nice, see the way the wind is blowing, go with dignity.

Since like Thatcher, Martin is utterly incapable of even seeing, much less understanding anyone's point of view except his own, this would be a good time to jump, but of course,as she was, he will have to be pushed.

[jno]

he's still got time to jump before he's pushed (but not much). I'm not sure it's true as MPs are claiming that he's 'not up to the job' - it seems to me he's been doing exactly the job MPs chose him for (protecting the privileges), but they're now embarrassed by it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/17 /nick-clegg-speaker-michael-martin

[Lonnie]

He'll hang on for as long as he can, he wants to reach the General Election so he can hand his constituancy to his son. If he goes beforehand, it'll cause a Bye-election, which is the last thing he wants,

Having said that, he only got the post because it was fixed in his favour. The mans been an incompetant ever since he got the job.

[rov1200]

They won't unseat him for the sole reason of the Labour party backing him up. Have you noticed recently that Nick Clegg who seemed a wallflower is asserting his masculinity now. He is in line for a sainthood if he carries on. He doesn't mention how profligerate councils run by the Liberals tend to be. Their spending plans and laxness in controlling our borders would be a disaster.

[andy-hughes]

He should be responsible, rather than a scapegoat, because he was in charge of the department that agreed and paid the expenses, and he has made serious efforts outside his official remit to keep the whole shoddy business quiet.

The man is a disgrace and an embarasment, and should be made to go, now.

[anotheoldgit]

He's gone.