Hamish Macdonell: Self-interest of ministers shames the Commons

Published on Monday 18 May 2009 22:02

THE expenses scandal currently consuming the House of Commons is a tale of two bunkers: one is the bunker at The Daily Telegraph offices in London where the devastating material is kept, seen only by a chosen few, and the other is the mentality over at the Palace of Westminster where MPs are cowering, fearful of the barrage to come.

British democracy has never seen anything like it. Most political scandals have a day, or at most two, of startling revelation with the rest being fallout. This extraordinary story has been running for 12 days, each one bringing fresh disclosures and adding yet another thin layer of public outrage to the crippling weight bearing down upon our 'honourable' members.

But with all the attention now focused on Michael Martin, the beleaguered Speaker – how harder would he have struggled when 'dragged' to the chair nine years ago had he known what was to come? – it is worth considering the political wrangling taking place in the main parties over his future, because it is anything but straightforward.

Make no mistake, most Labour MPs would push the Speaker over the edge if it was to save their collective careers but there are other considerations to be taken into account.

While it is true that Mr Martin's departure would sate some public anger, it would not go to the heart of the problem, which is the erosion of faith in parliament, and that would still have to be rectified.

There is also the possibility that Mr Martin's departure would simply move the focus on to other Labour MPs and on to the government. At the moment, the Speaker is acting as a lightning rod for the expenses scandal and, to a certain extent, it suits the Labour Party to allow him to continue in that role.

Then there is the tricky issue of a potential by-election. Mr Martin could be forced out as Speaker and remain an MP but he might decide that he has suffered enough and that he owes his party nothing. If that was the case, he could resign as an MP, triggering a by-election in Glasgow North East.

This would be potentially calamitous for Labour. The by-election would become the focus for all public fury over MPs' expenses, it would represent the first opportunity for the people to show their anger and Labour would almost certainly lose, probably by a sizeable margin.

Mr Martin's constituency has always been safe Labour territory but, because of that, its local party is one of the quietest, with about 100 members and maybe 20 or so activists prepared to go out and campaign.

Turn-out has also been very low in the constituency, with many people just not bothering to vote because there was no chance of effecting change.

This is really the last real bargaining chip available to Mr Martin. He could let it be known to his Labour colleagues that if they decide to force him out of office, he will go the whole way and resign as an MP as well, sparking a damaging by-election in Labour heartlands.

If this situation is causing some problems in the Labour Party, the dilemma is only slightly less problematic for the Tories. The basic political instinct for many Conservatives is to keep Mr Martin in his place. If he remains, Mr Martin will act as a continual reminder, not only of Labour's role in the expenses debacle, but its failure to do anything properly about it.

But balanced against this is the Tories' desire to be seen to be rectifying the situation. David Cameron scored well with the public when he moved quickly against his MPs who had bent the rules almost to breaking point. Indeed, Mr Cameron's decisive action also showed up the dithering and hesitant approach of the Prime Minister.

Keeping Mr Martin in his place would benefit the Conservatives in some ways but they too have to be careful about the overall damage being done to the institution of parliament. Public trust has been eroded to such an extent that the Tories may well feel the backdraft from it at the European elections and at the next Westminster election too, and this is something they are desperate to avoid.

It is also likely that the Tories would have to put up the next Speaker to replace Mr Martin. That too is fraught with difficulty. Given the extent of the crisis at the moment, it is not a job anyone would want and it would not help the Tories if one of their number also ran into difficulties trying to sort it out from the Speaker's chair.

So, Labour need Mr Martin in his place, at least until he becomes too much of a liability for the party, and then he will have to go – but only if he remains an MP and does not force a by-election.

The Tories need Mr Martin in his place, but only as long as he focuses attention on to Labour's failings. As soon as the Tories start to suffer, then they would need to see him gone as well.

The only party with a clear and unambiguous political approach to Mr Martin's future is the SNP. The Nationalists would be the likely gainers from a by-election in Glasgow North East, allowing Alex Salmond to build on last year's startling success in Glasgow East.

Mr Martin may well have looked around the Commons during his statement yesterday in the hope of seeing some friendly faces to support him and he may have caught sight of one or two. But Mr Martin knows that, within days, those few friendly faces might start to look shiftily at the floor, unable to look him in the eye. When that happens, he is finished.

The 'honourable' course of action for all MPs would be for them either to stick by the Speaker on principle or to stand up and publicly challenge him – and then to abide by that decision.

How many will do that? Very few. Most will sit quiet and wait, weighing up their options and moving to assassinate the Speaker if and when it is in their interests to do so.

It is a quite shameful spectacle but it really shouldn't surprise us. Self-interest seems to be what British politics is all about now.