|
Post by johnloony on Aug 29, 2023 23:49:10 GMT
She got the job! Dear Nadine I am writing to confirm that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has this morning appointed you to be Steward and Bailiff of the Three Hundreds of Chiltern. Your appointment continues until determined by a subsequent appointment to this Stewardship. I will inform the Speaker of the House of Commons next. Best wishes… What happens if someone wants to run again, Carswell-style? They run again, Carswell-style. The thing that disqualifies an MP from being an MP is being *appointed* to be the S & B of the 3 H of Ch. Actually *being* the S & B of the 3 H of Ch doesn’t matter.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,909
|
Post by Khunanup on Aug 30, 2023 0:15:45 GMT
What happens if someone wants to run again, Carswell-style? They run again, Carswell-style. The thing that disqualifies an MP from being an MP is being *appointed* to be the S & B of the 3 H of Ch. Actually *being* the S & B of the 3 H of Ch doesn’t matter. Yes it does as holding that office is an office of profit under the crown (ie a civil servant) and therefore disqualifies you until you relinquish it (which is usually when the Chancellor appoints someone else). As with any other OOPUC, you can resign from it and therefore be eligible to stand for election again.
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Aug 30, 2023 7:11:04 GMT
They run again, Carswell-style. The thing that disqualifies an MP from being an MP is being *appointed* to be the S & B of the 3 H of Ch. Actually *being* the S & B of the 3 H of Ch doesn’t matter. Yes it does as holding that office is an office of profit under the crown (ie a civil servant) and therefore disqualifies you until you relinquish it (which is usually when the Chancellor appoints someone else). As with any other OOPUC, you can resign from it and therefore be eligible to stand for election again. That’s not true, what John said is correct. In 2008 David Davis was appointed and then immediately released to avoid any uncertainty, but that didn’t happen in 2014 with Carswell and Reckless. I had thought something similar to the 2008 situation might have happened when the two Sinn Fien MPs resigned, but again it didn’t.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Aug 30, 2023 9:45:13 GMT
On 17 December 1985 all the Unionist MPs in Northern Ireland were appointed in succession to the Stewardships; the last appointments being Enoch Powell to Northstead and Rev William McCrea to the Chiltern Hundreds. No new appointments took place before they were re-elected on 23 January 1986 so they still held the 'post's. No question of their eligibility for re-election was raised.
On 12 July 1929 Sir William Jowitt was appointed to the Chiltern Hundreds. On 31 July he was re-elected as MP for Preston. No other appointment had intervened and his eligibility for re-election was never challenged.
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Aug 30, 2023 10:00:42 GMT
I think the relevant act is House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975 which sets out the list of offices the holding of (not the acceptance of) which disqualifies existing MPs and renders the holder ineligible for election. However, section 4 specifies that Northstead etc and Chiltern Hundreds etc only count as such offices for the purpose of disqualifying existing members, not for rendering them ineligible for further election. So it is not the acceptance of offices that is relevant but rather that these two are specifically not a bar to standing for election. www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/24/contents
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Aug 30, 2023 10:42:56 GMT
The historic rationale was this was a compromise between what we would now call a separation of powers and the power of the Commons. There was a real fear about the Crown/Government securing a majority through giving out offices but equally a reluctance to make ministerial and parliamentary office incompatible. The compromise was that a newly appointed MP would have to seek re-election to retain their seat alongside the post they were appointed to and thus give their constituency a veto over the placement.
(The procedure was modified over time and come 1919 it did not apply in the first nine months of a Parliament. Then in 1926 it was abolished altogether. It was duplicated in some Dominions and most notably caused a big row in Canada in 1926 to add to the existing one.)
The 1975 Act has clearly retained the principle that appointment not holding is a bar. Remember it was only a couple of years earlier that an MP had last resigned to recontest their seat so it was a live issue at the time.
David Davis was just resignation happy in 2008.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,379
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Aug 30, 2023 15:27:58 GMT
Constituency poll needed!
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Aug 30, 2023 16:29:50 GMT
She got the job! Dear Nadine I am writing to confirm that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has this morning appointed you to be Steward and Bailiff of the Three Hundreds of Chiltern. Your appointment continues until determined by a subsequent appointment to this Stewardship. I will inform the Speaker of the House of Commons next. Best wishes… Has anyone ever been appointed to a stewardship twice? Or even three times?
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Aug 30, 2023 16:35:00 GMT
She got the job! Dear Nadine I am writing to confirm that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has this morning appointed you to be Steward and Bailiff of the Three Hundreds of Chiltern. Your appointment continues until determined by a subsequent appointment to this Stewardship. I will inform the Speaker of the House of Commons next. Best wishes… Has anyone ever been appointed to a stewardship twice? Or even three times? Boris Johnson twice, I'm sure there must be plenty of others.
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Aug 30, 2023 16:38:19 GMT
She got the job! Dear Nadine I am writing to confirm that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has this morning appointed you to be Steward and Bailiff of the Three Hundreds of Chiltern. Your appointment continues until determined by a subsequent appointment to this Stewardship. I will inform the Speaker of the House of Commons next. Best wishes… Has anyone ever been appointed to a stewardship twice? Or even three times? I don't think so but Boris Johnson and was appointed Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead in 2008 and then Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds earlier this year,
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Aug 30, 2023 16:42:43 GMT
Charles Beresford appears to have taken stewardships four times!
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Aug 30, 2023 16:47:34 GMT
Charles Beresford appears to have taken stewardships four times! And he's not the only one I'll warrant.
|
|
|
Post by batman on Aug 30, 2023 17:31:03 GMT
Constituency poll needed! there already has been one, showing Labour ahead, but it was quite a few weeks or even months ago
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Aug 30, 2023 17:55:23 GMT
Charles Beresford appears to have taken stewardships four times! Looked him up on Wikipedia - a long and fascinating career and life. How did you know this? It's amazing what people here know.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,909
|
Post by Khunanup on Aug 30, 2023 18:17:02 GMT
I think the relevant act is House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975 which sets out the list of offices the holding of (not the acceptance of) which disqualifies existing MPs and renders the holder ineligible for election. However, section 4 specifies that Northstead etc and Chiltern Hundreds etc only count as such offices for the purpose of disqualifying existing members, not for rendering them ineligible for further election. So it is not the acceptance of offices that is relevant but rather that these two are specifically not a bar to standing for election. www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/24/contentsThanks for this. Just goes to show what nonsense this all is, and the weakness of our democracy being based on convention and the whim of random nonsensical legal decisions that fly in the face of reality. Just let them flat out resign and stop this legal fiction (after all, it can just be changed on a whim...).
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Aug 30, 2023 18:34:58 GMT
I think the relevant act is House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975 which sets out the list of offices the holding of (not the acceptance of) which disqualifies existing MPs and renders the holder ineligible for election. However, section 4 specifies that Northstead etc and Chiltern Hundreds etc only count as such offices for the purpose of disqualifying existing members, not for rendering them ineligible for further election. So it is not the acceptance of offices that is relevant but rather that these two are specifically not a bar to standing for election. www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/24/contentsThanks for this. Just goes to show what nonsense this all is, and the weakness of our democracy being based on convention and the whim of random nonsensical legal decisions that fly in the face of reality. Just let them flat out resign and stop this legal fiction (after all, it can just be changed on a whim...). I have always advocated for a great big reset switch to be hit so this country could eventually enter modern times like the rest of civilization. The fact that MPs can't resign, they don't even have employment contracts, is just symbolic of the Gentlemen's Club way of running the country, an attitude which still anchors us to the days of workhouses and the Empire. Stella Creasey was on a podcast I listen to pointing out that she was told that being given maternity leave would 'cause a constitutional headache', to which she responded, 'first off, I'd like to see the constitution you think would be effected." In response to Dorries, I'd make two immediate changes; add non-attendance having taken the Oath subject to Recall, and allow MPs to just resign without going through the Gormanghast bullshit. I don't trust that our right-wing chums club political establishment would ever allow such radical suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Aug 30, 2023 18:38:41 GMT
Thanks for this. Just goes to show what nonsense this all is, and the weakness of our democracy being based on convention and the whim of random nonsensical legal decisions that fly in the face of reality. Just let them flat out resign and stop this legal fiction (after all, it can just be changed on a whim...). I have always advocated for a great big reset switch to be hit so this country could eventually enter modern times like the rest of civilization. The fact that MPs can't resign, they don't even have employment contracts, is just symbolic of the Gentlemen's Club way of running the country, an attitude which still anchors us to the days of workhouses and the Empire. Stella Creasey was on a podcast I listen to pointing out that she was told that being given maternity leave would 'cause a constitutional headache', to which she responded, 'first off, I'd like to see the constitution you think would be effected." In response to Dorries, I'd make two immediate changes; add non-attendance having taken the Oath subject to Recall, and allow MPs to just resign without going through the Gormanghast bullshit. I don't trust that our right-wing chums club political establishment would ever allow such radical suggestions. Well its better than any of johnloony 's poems - that's the only good thing I can say about it.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 30, 2023 19:17:57 GMT
I have always advocated for a great big reset switch to be hit so this country could eventually enter modern times like the rest of civilization. The fact that MPs can't resign, they don't even have employment contracts, is just symbolic of the Gentlemen's Club way of running the country, an attitude which still anchors us to the days of workhouses and the Empire. Stella Creasey was on a podcast I listen to pointing out that she was told that being given maternity leave would 'cause a constitutional headache', to which she responded, 'first off, I'd like to see the constitution you think would be effected." In response to Dorries, I'd make two immediate changes; add non-attendance having taken the Oath subject to Recall, and allow MPs to just resign without going through the Gormanghast bullshit. I don't trust that our right-wing chums club political establishment would ever allow such radical suggestions. Well its better than any of johnloony 's poems - that's the only good thing I can say about it. Some of my poems are very good. Have you read all 200 pages of them in my book? If not, how can you use the word “any”?
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Aug 30, 2023 22:19:18 GMT
I have always advocated for a great big reset switch to be hit so this country could eventually enter modern times like the rest of civilization. The fact that MPs can't resign, they don't even have employment contracts, is just symbolic of the Gentlemen's Club way of running the country, an attitude which still anchors us to the days of workhouses and the Empire. Ahistoric nonsense. The reasons MPs can't resign goes back much further to the days when they were serving in more ways than one and were not allowed to just casually walk away from their duties and the disqualification by appointment to office of profit is, IIRC, a product of the struggles between the Crown and Parliament of the 17th century. The current arrangements allow MPs to leave so anyone proposing changing the details of the procedure to get exactly the same thing (an MP formally submits a letter to someone, they verify it, the MP is out of post) is just engaging in timewasting pointless tokenistic gesture politics for the sake of it.
|
|
|
Post by stb12 on Aug 30, 2023 22:43:45 GMT
I’ve got no objection to that system changing but ultimately it makes little to no practical difference, the only time it even gets any coverage at all is when you have the Sinn Fein resignations due to the particular gallery they need to play to or the unusual situation of how Dorries has handled and dragged this out
If you’re trying to renew the political process I wouldn’t think the way resignations happen is high up the priority list at all
|
|