Does there need to be a new by-election rule?

Makerfield was manipulative in a different way, but I don’t see that a new rule to stop one MP stepping down and another from the same party standing instead would be feasible.

I do think that an MP who is currently under investigation for serious misconduct should be barred from standing down and seeking re-election whilst the investigation is ongoing.

I totally agree regarding MPs (and councillors) not being permitted to change party, part way through an electoral term, because people voted for them on the basis of which party they represented at the election. They can either resign or stand for a different party the next time there is an election instead.

Maremia

They should have had a by-election without him.

So you are in favour of controlling who can stand as an MP.

What should the criteria be?

On another thread a couple of people are in favour of limiting it to people who have high levels of money or financial backing.

Quite a hark back to the days when only the rich could make our laws.

A beautiful summary Casdon- is it not hot where you are?

I think that people are in danger of forgetting the reason Farage gave for resigning and forcing this unnecessary by-election.

I quote from his explanation:

why should I be judged today, or in history in the future, by Sky News and their ilk? Why should they be the people that decide my fate? When, as I repeat, I have done nothing wrong.

“I thought about it hard and I have decided today I will resign as a Member of Parliament for Clacton-on-Sea, thereby forcing a by-election, which should happen, I hope, in short order.

"*Now I’ve decided that the people of Clacton should be the judges of my actions.* This will be a people versus the establishment by-election. It’s a chance to stick two fingers up to the entire Establishment to frankly tell them where to go, and that is why I will be putting my name forward to stand in this by-election.

Quote taken from here:

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/clacton-election-taking-place-34443044

I tried to write a post about the serious anti democratic implications of what Farage said but was getting bogged down so I gave the quoted passage to AI to respond to and its response is very much what I wanted to say. So here it is:

The really disturbing thing about this argument is the suggestion that “the people of Clacton should be the judges of my actions” because Parliament is investigating an MP for an alleged breach of parliamentary standards.

No. The people of Clacton are the judges of who represents them in Parliament. They are not a substitute for Parliament's own disciplinary and standards procedures.

In our parliamentary democracy, those are two quite different functions. Parliament establishes rules governing the conduct of its members and has procedures for investigating alleged breaches of those rules. The electorate then decides who should represent them.

To portray this as “the people versus the establishment” is therefore deeply misleading. Parliament isn't some external, anti-democratic authority standing above the electorate. Parliament is itself a democratic institution, and its standards system exists precisely because MPs are supposed to be accountable to rules as well as to voters.

An MP cannot simply turn an investigation into a popularity contest by resigning, forcing a by-election and inviting voters to declare him innocent. A successful by-election would demonstrate that voters want him as their MP. It would not establish whether he breached parliamentary standards.

Otherwise, the argument amounts to: if enough people vote for me, the rules no longer apply to me.

That isn't democracy. It's an attempt to make electoral popularity the arbiter of parliamentary conduct.

I would add that at one point in his 'rationale' Farage says I have done nothing wrong. Isn't that the cry of every criminal throughout history?

Wow MaizieD

mum2three

It does seem an odd thing to do, but Farage wanted to give people the chance to get rid of him if they so chose. Instead it has confirmed the support he has.

That’s so not the point.

This isn’t at all what Farage did, his gripe is with being investigated. The investigated has restarted.

Until this has been completed, none of us, including Farage, know if he’s done anything wrong, either unintentionally or intentionally.

He’s not the only one in his tiny “party” being investigated for financial irregularities.

The political circus he caused is a complete disgrace and extremely expensive and time consuming.

I feel the same way about Burnham, even though that’s the party of my choice.

I utterly abhor our politics currently, from Badenoch’s ridiculous ideas, to Farage’s dramatic hissy fits, to the way Starmer was replaced, to Polanski’s stunts.

They should all feel thoroughly ashamed and get on with the jobs they are all paid to do. (In my opinion)

If any of us had behaved in these manners in our own jobs I would wager we’d have been fired, and rightly so. 🤬🤬🤬

MaizieD

I think that people are in danger of forgetting the reason Farage gave for resigning and forcing this unnecessary by-election.

I quote from his explanation:

why should I be judged today, or in history in the future, by Sky News and their ilk? Why should they be the people that decide my fate? When, as I repeat, I have done nothing wrong.

“I thought about it hard and I have decided today I will resign as a Member of Parliament for Clacton-on-Sea, thereby forcing a by-election, which should happen, I hope, in short order.

"*Now I’ve decided that the people of Clacton should be the judges of my actions.* This will be a people versus the establishment by-election. It’s a chance to stick two fingers up to the entire Establishment to frankly tell them where to go, and that is why I will be putting my name forward to stand in this by-election.

Quote taken from here:

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/clacton-election-taking-place-34443044

I tried to write a post about the serious anti democratic implications of what Farage said but was getting bogged down so I gave the quoted passage to AI to respond to and its response is very much what I wanted to say. So here it is:

The really disturbing thing about this argument is the suggestion that “the people of Clacton should be the judges of my actions” because Parliament is investigating an MP for an alleged breach of parliamentary standards.

No. The people of Clacton are the judges of who represents them in Parliament. They are not a substitute for Parliament's own disciplinary and standards procedures.

In our parliamentary democracy, those are two quite different functions. Parliament establishes rules governing the conduct of its members and has procedures for investigating alleged breaches of those rules. The electorate then decides who should represent them.

To portray this as “the people versus the establishment” is therefore deeply misleading. Parliament isn't some external, anti-democratic authority standing above the electorate. Parliament is itself a democratic institution, and its standards system exists precisely because MPs are supposed to be accountable to rules as well as to voters.

An MP cannot simply turn an investigation into a popularity contest by resigning, forcing a by-election and inviting voters to declare him innocent. A successful by-election would demonstrate that voters want him as their MP. It would not establish whether he breached parliamentary standards.

Otherwise, the argument amounts to: if enough people vote for me, the rules no longer apply to me.

That isn't democracy. It's an attempt to make electoral popularity the arbiter of parliamentary conduct.

I would add that at one point in his 'rationale' Farage says I have done nothing wrong. Isn't that the cry of every criminal throughout history?

I agree completely with both Mazie and AI.

A lot of this deterioration I'm standards is media led.

DaisyAnneReturns

mum2three

It does seem an odd thing to do, but Farage wanted to give people the chance to get rid of him if they so chose. Instead it has confirmed the support he has.

That's a very kind way of looking at it mum2three

Yes. It shows that he was capable of beating a dustbin …

I dont think it is media led, I think it is to do with quality of politicians, I am glad the media are there to be honest to highlight the likes of Mandelsson etc.

If an MP crosses the floor there definitely should be a by-election in my opinion.

I think the reasons given by NF for the Clacton by-election are questionable.

He offered to pay for the costs out of his/Reforms pocket, I can only assume that he knew that under English law that is not permitted.

Despite my feelings regarding the circumstances of the Makersfield by-election, it was not illegal under current laws.

Galaxy

I dont think it is media led, I think it is to do with quality of politicians, I am glad the media are there to be honest to highlight the likes of Mandelsson etc.

That is absolutely fair enough, but the media (Press, TV and radio) over the past few years has done very little to highlight Farage's mendacity. Far from it, they've been bigging him up as a potential PM.

I completely agree with MaizieD. There should be a rule that MPs subject to current parliamentary investigation and their party finances currently subject to police investigation should not be able to call a local by election and then immediately put themselves forward to be re-elected for an MP role they are already in.

The council had to spend £250,000+ to carry out the completely unnecessary Clacton by election process.

MPs who cross the floor to another party on balance I think should subject themselves to a by election as their new party candidate.

In Maakerfield there was a by election after the incumbent MP resigned. You can't stop MPs resigning for whatever reason, illness, retirement, personal reasons whatever. Evidently that creates an MP vacancy as in the case of Markerfield and every other location an MP has resigned. All parties then decided who to put forward their preferred candidate in a level playing field scenario. AB also had to secure LP executive committee permission to stand on which he took a chance previously- denied- this time allowed. AB did go on to emphatically win the Makerfield by election fair and square on his own merit and is currently doing better than any other party leader in national polls. So I would not put a rule in place to disallow MPs from resigning for whatever reason as long as a by election follows so there is a legitimate electorate vote in every case and not just a shoe in replacement MP.

Reform offered to pay the by election costs no doubt fully aware that it is not permissible in law to do so. Although nothing at all stops Reform UK donating £250,000 either to Clacton Council or more appropriately a £250,000 sum to various key charities in the Clacton constituency.

If it was a genuine offer that is 🫤