There did, at times of late, seem to be no way to prevent a no deal Brexit. The fact that legislation will be required appeared to be an insurmountable obstacle given the government's control of the business agenda of the House of Commons. Despite being a minority government, and riven by its own factions that it is, convention alone appeared to give it the right to ride roughshod over the will of the supposedly sovereign parliament.
And then came John Bercow, who has clearly decided that his last days as Speaker - which were already numbered - will be ones in which he will change history. It appears almost absurd to think that a simple change to a timetable motion could be so momentous. And yet, yesterday's decision by Bercow to let parliament decide the use of its own time was just that, because in a moment Bercow rebalanced power in a divided Commons, giving MPs a rare chance to exercise control over the country's executive.
I have three thoughts.
First, he was right to do so. Parliament must be sovereign, and in this rare situation we now witness that the handing of power to an executive that is clearly not able to command support was wrong in his view, and he was willing to do something about it. Given the problems for accountability created by the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, and May's obvious contempt for MPs wishes, he had no choice but act. He broke precedent, maybe, but the reality was that the ability of the government to survive despite its inability to govern because of its inability to win parliamentary support demanded that he did, and justified it.
Second, at the crucial time the chance for a majority to work together in the common good has been created. It's not clear what the consequence will be as yet, of course. That this might break the whip system, at least on occasion, has to be wholly to the good of parliament, politics and the life of this country. When very large numbers have been alienated by our major political parties for MPs to reclaim the initiative is desirable and makes clear that who is in Parliament might matter again.
Third, I suspect Bercow will pay a high price for this. I suspect few in political power will eventually thank him. The right will vilify him. History will be his friend. But he may be isolated for some time.
But I think his decision is truly refreshing and a source of hope that parliament might become relevant once more. And that has to be good news. We are, after all, taking back control. It's long been needed.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Is Brexit being used as a coup?
No
How can parliament being on control be a coup?
Troops are being readied already for March. Some Tories already want the UK to be a Singaporean style country – but is a very authoritarian country which they’d just love – as long as it’s Tory/Neoliberal control. So some form of martial law might be just round the corner. Fixed term parliament gets you to 2022 for the next election – that gives you three years to really crack down.
Same in America. If Trump loses next year I have no faith he will stand down. Even if he wins next year the two term rule means he’s out in 2024 – I have little faith he would honour that either.
It’s the mother of all parliaments. As Conservatives like to say.
We from the Isle of Man would not agree with that! 🙂 Our Parliament – Tynwald – claims to be the World’s oldest continuous democratic parliament celebrating 1000 years back in 1979. So we say that Tynwald is therefore the grandmother of parliaments. Most MHKs sit as independents and there is little tradition of political parties. In addition any Manx voter can present a petition against any new legislation at the annual outdoor Tynwald ceremony on Old Midsummer’s Day that causes that legislation to be sent back to be reconsidered, so we have direct public involvement too. Plus the Island was the first in Europe to give women the vote way back in 1866.
Richard does, of course, have a go at the IoM from time to time because of the tax haven reputation, but in many ways it is not and never has been very secret, at least for those that live there. Details of every property transaction with the price, etc get published in the newspapers every week and have been for years. Also wills get published too and there was a long tradition that you had to make sure you did not ‘die under four figures’. In other words you had to leave at least £1,000 which given we are talking a hundred years ago when a pound was actually worth something involved quite a lot of life time saving! My folks always said that everyone knew everything about everyone, but that was more about gossip like sex, who couldn’t pay their bills, etc.
Hmmmm
You are still the most massive secrecy jurisdiction
My folks sold the farm and left the IoM back in 1974 when I was 12 to go to South Africa, and as it happens just at the wrong time so they missed out on the boom in the island economy that set in from the late 1970s. So I can’t say about offshore companies, etc and how secret they are as I don’t know. What I can say is that in order to benefit from low personal tax on the Island you do have to live there and you can’t visit the UK for more than 60 days a year without getting caught by HMRC. Also the Island has for a long time provided information on e.g. bank accounts to HMRC on request. If it does not have a public register of companies, directors, accounts, etc then it should have.
You would also have to consider Manx history to realise there is little love lost between the Manx and Westminster. Back in 1826 or thereabouts the UK government bought the Island from the Duke of Atholl for £220,000 (which paid for Blair Castle and much more), and then spent the next 40 years forcing the Manx to repay it to them plus interest while refusing to spend any money on e.g. roads and harbours. The discontent led to the Restoration of Home Rule in 1866. Even more recently Alistair Darling staged a £450 million raid on the Shared Customs Revenue pool that arises from the fact that the Island is in a Customs Union with the UK. The Island gets charged each year for non-existent Defence and Foreign Affairs Services, plus every Manx Student at a UK university is charged the full Overseas Student fee (which the Manx Government pays on their behalf). Interestingly unlike other Overseas Fees this money from the IoM does not go to the University but is kept by the UK treasury. Over the years the Manx Government had to buy the Common Grazings, two Royal Castles, ownership of the coastal waters, post office, etc from Westminster.
If you look at why Darling acted against the IoM you will find I provided the data to cause the action
And I am proud to say so
OK, what is the story behind the Darling raid on the Shared Customs Revenues? It is as I understand it the case that HMRC collects the VAT and Excise Duties from the Isle of Man on behalf of the Manx Government so that is why there is a pool in the first place.
I have had some experience of Jersey which seems much worse than whatever the IoM might have done. My very rich late Greatuncle who lived in Cape Town from 1951 (under a non-dom agreement with Malan, Union Prime Minister at the time, that exempted his foreign income and capital (i.e. everything since he was coming from Malaya at the time) from SA tax. But just to make sure he moved everything into the ownership of a Jersey company called the Harcroft Trust Ltd in 1975 of which he was not even a Director. When he died at 98 in 1998 and was survived by his second wife then even his family found it impossible to find out even if there was a will let alone what was in it. It was not until 2015 a couple of years after the death of my greataunt (who got to 106!) that it finally came to light that the control of the trust (and thus everything) had in fact passed to her daughter. The trust director in Jersey (i.e. effectively the Executor) had in the interim simply brushed off any requests for details or explanation. Interestingly he had previously had much of his money in the IoM (his parents lived in Ramsey until their death in 1961) but moved it to Jersey as he thought the IoM was nowhere near secret enough.
It started here http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2007/03/18/the-uk-paying-the-isle-of-man-to-be-a-tax-haven/
There is lots on the blog on this
OK, fair enough if the formula for dividing the customs pool was wrong. However I understand it was supposed to be agreed each year between experts from the Treasury and the IoM Government based on an economic analysis so if it was the wrong split then it was wrong because HM Treasury agreed it should be wrong. I think paying £600 per person for the defence of the Island per year is a complete non-starter as there is no defence. My Dad was vaguely involved back in 1968 when Harold Wilson first had the idea of making the Island pay and Tynwald disposed of that in short order by suggesting defence should in that case be put out to international tender as they would probably get a better offer from the USSR. That was at a time when defence cuts had just led to the closure of RAF Jurby and the departure of the last naval / coastguard / army personnel. There has been no permanent UK military presence of any kind since.
I can tell you that when I was a child in the 1960s the Island was very depressed with the main industry (tourism) in terminal decline, median income only 70% of the UK and a steadily falling population. There were a lot of unhelpful things later as e.g. the state owned (about to be privatised) Sealink put the Isle of Man Steam Packet company into bankruptcy by undercutting it (technically a merger took place), the Island had to bail out and buy the floating dock in Liverpool etc. So I don’t agree with secrecy or helping folk break the law, but the island has managed to get out of that downward spiral. Personally I would also get rid of Jeremy Clarkson and the English arrivals can take away all their ‘No Trespassing – Keep Out’ signs which are a flagrant violation of the Manx tradition of freedom to roam (I pulled up several on our last visit!). My Dad was always strict that anyone was welcome to walk across our farm.
I totally agree with your post and with Mr Speaker.
In fact I have resolved to write to Mr Bercow and offer my support to him such as it is.
This Parliament has been the ‘mother’ in the American sense (mother ******) for those with no majority seeking to have their way thinking that they belong to some long lost line of Kings from the medieval age.
Shame on them.
Agreed too.
Reminded of Lord Denning who was supposed to have said that he found being a judge absolutely exhausting – but that his colleagues were only interested in administering the law whereas he wanted to dispense justice. From that fact nobody is of course quite sure what the law is until judgement is received. That is its disadvantage.
Bercow has done a similar sort of thing and is not concerned with what exactly forthwith could or should mean but rather if the legislature should control the executive.
That it should seems to me practically all voters would agree on. So much less of a disadvantage. Indeed arguably a decision that was overdue.
Agreed – a nice, neat synopsis of what Bercow has actually done.
I’ve frequently been impressed by John Bercow in his role as speaker. He’s a smart cookie and a great performer, whether one approves or not…he is impressive.
And I’m sure you’re right that he will have made enemies particularly on the government benches, but they have made him dangerous themselves by attacking him and forcing him into the corner where he has nothing to lose. And it is no part of the Speaker’s job description that he be likeable, his job is to make parliament work not to please the incumbent government.
The time for playing silly games on the Brexit issue is well past. We will see now if there is a majority in Parliament with a similar responsible attitude. We are, when all’s said and done, in a position of constitutional crisis.
Tim Rideout presents a whimsical picture of Tynwald the Isle of Man’s sturdy and trusty parliament. As a Manxman, and Manx resident, I strongly disagree with him. The government’s independence is doubtful, it’s more a case of we do what we like – so long as Westminster says so.
The so called “independence ” of our MHKs is risible, in reality most of them, with the odd notable exception, are wealthy, hard line, right wing Tories. The result being we end up with a government of which Thatcher would be proud. We don’t have a party system, regretfully, consequently we have an executive without opposition. The Treasury minister has just announced some cruel changes to the benefit system as it affects single parents. There’s been no debate on it and it would seem he dreamed up the idea himself, perhaps on the back of the proverbial fag packet for all we know. Their introduction will take place in an arbitrary manner, our proud “democracy” is in practise little more than an elected dictatorship.
Hi Jim, well I am Manx too but I have not lived in the island since I was 12 so I only know very little about the modern politics. I vaguely know Donald Gelling as his family had the farm down the road from us at Oatlands and my Dad thus knew them. I think the main complaint I remember about the Manx government was either incompetence (Summerland, the Douglas fire station with the doors too small for the fire engines, and the like) or cronyism. However if they are now mostly right wing tories then you (as in the voters) will have to vote them out. We have the same problem here with the Ruth Davidson for Ruth Davidson Party ™.
Personally I think the Island should opt for full independence as I think we will very soon now in Scotland (unless they successfully terrorise the pensioners again 🙁 ). I don’t see what benefit you get from the existing arrangement. You can still keep Mrs Windsor as Lord of Mann if anyone is worried about that!
I strongly agree with your first point Richard even if, in my opinion, MPs aren’t at this moment being too wise with the power they’ve reclaimed. It’s going to be very interesting to see how this plays out and like you I hope it leads to fresher parliamentary politics less beholden to the party whips and more responsive to the electorate.
On your third point yes I think Bercow will get rough ride in the short term. However he’ll be recognised as a hero much sooner than the MP you owe the greatest thanks to for avoiding Brexit – Theresa May 😉
May has not avoided it yet
The Duke of Atholl (or his family) was paid £70,000 by the English Treasury in 1765 in an attempt to buy him out so that English customs could be installed in the IOM to curtail the huge international smuggling business based there. It was the first of several payments such as the £417,000 paid in 1828 which Governor Walpole described as “absurdly extravagant.” It was also ineffective as were similar efforts to install English customs houses in the Channel Islands to curtail the smuggling there – and the struggle continues today.
All sorts of absurd claims have been made about the supposed ancient governments in all the Islands. The Duke in 1820 realistically declared that “the Keys are no more representative of the people of Man than the people of Peru.”
I like that last one…
But it would have been true of the Commons at the time as well
I too agree with your post; very well done Mr Speaker. Hope is reborn.
But I am puzzled by one of your sentences – ” I suspect few in political power will eventually thank him.” Did you mean “a few” – or not?
Ah ! The subtlety of the English language. 🙂