Parliament

So three million quid gets you a seat in the House of Lords? That’s according to the latest revelations about our sleazy second chamber. According to a Sunday Times and Open Democracy investigation, people who give big bucks to the Conservative party are virtually assured a seat on the red benches. Wealthy benefactors seem to be ‘guaranteed a peerage if they take on the temporary role as the party treasurer and increase their own donations beyond £3m’, the report says. It stacks up. Fifteen out of 16 Tory party treasurers have been offered a seat in the Lords. And 22 of the party’s main financial backers, including those who have doubled up as party treasurer, have been offered seats.

MPs have voted in favour of overhauling their own watchdog after its decision to ban a senior Tory backbencher from the House of Commons. The committee on standards found that former minister Owen Paterson had breached lobbying rules and recommended he be suspended from the House for 30 days. However, the government backed an amendment to the vote on his suspension — normally treated as a formality — that will now see a new committee set up to fix 'potential defects' in the way the current disciplinary system works. Detractors of the cross-party body have accused the standards commissioner, Kathryn Stone, of anti-Tory bias.

Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament. Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first.

The Speaker was annoyed again today when the government only offered the Commons a Covid update after the Health Secretary's press briefing yesterday. Labour hauled vaccines minister Maggie Throup to the chamber for an urgent question. Before she had a chance to answer, Lindsay Hoyle scolded her superiors. 'This is not acceptable and, as I have warned the government, in those circumstances, I will allow the House the earliest opportunity to hear from a minister: in this case by an urgent question,' he said.

My first full-time job, at the age of 18, was working for an MP. In the following 27 years, almost my entire career has been spent in or near Westminster. I know and have known lots of MPs. To coin a phrase, some of my best friends are members of parliament. This, of course, means I’m biased on the topic of MPs, inclined by reason or familiarity to think well of them as a group. But it also means, I hope, that I have a bit of knowledge — knowledge that might be worth sharing as the Commons remembers Sir David Amess and James Brokenshire. It’s hard to generalise about an inherently diverse group, but MPs as a whole are not, in an important way, like the rest of us. To reach the Commons requires a type of drive and motivation that most people lack.

What with an energy crisis, a fuel crisis and a food crisis, you would think MPs have enough on their plates. But word reaches Mr S that our long-suffering elected representatives have now been hit by a shortage of crucial goods as the supply chain chaos resonates in the halls of Westminster.  Ministers used to working late on the parliamentary estate – burning the midnight oil on a diet of KitKats and Mini Cheddars – will have been horrified to discover that their favourite snacks are currently denied to them, as they work to tackle Britain's various crises.

Today was the first PMQs clash between Boris Johnson and Keir Starmer in a packed Commons chamber. Starmer tried to pin down Johnson on whether he could guarantee that no one would have to pay their home to fund their care. Johnson dodged the question. But Starmer was limited by the fact that Labour can’t say how it would raise funds for the NHS backlog and social care, allowing Johnson to claim that Labour has no plan. Starmer is a naturally cautious politician, but his caution is leaving the field clear for Johnson on social care. Things would have been more difficult for the Prime Minister today if Labour was explicitly backing a tax on assets.

This morning Playbook has revealed details about the plans – codenamed Operation London Bridge – for the sad day when the Queen passes away. But while the outlet's excellent write-up reveals much about the preparations involved for Her Majesty's death, Steerpike noted that one detail about the behind the scenes work was somewhat glossed over: advanced plans for the royal coffin to lie in state at Westminster Hall. Codenamed ‘Operation Marquee’ – a moniker last used for the Queen Mother’s ceremony in 2002 – the plans have been kept tightly under wraps for decades and will run with military precision, judging by its expenditure. Between 2010 and 2020 some £2.

The bars at Parliament have played host to many scenes over the years – plots, arguments, merriment and even fisticuffs – but rarely to an empty house. But for much of Covid, the watering holes of Westminster have been remained closed, in line with government guidance. And now Mr S has found that the restoration of our liberties and the collapse of Covid cases has failed to prompt a surge in sales; sobering news when one considers how some within the estate are itching to close its taverns. A list of the top 100 bar items sold between January to July reveals a dismal return of 2,967 items sold for an estate which employs approximately 3,000 people. Clearly, many are still reluctant to shed virtual working and mix in the fleshpots of SW1.

Today’s Commons debate on Afghanistan was unusually and surprisingly good. It had the benefit of speeches from many MPs who had themselves served tours of duty in the country, or were veterans of military action elsewhere. It had the advantage of a former Prime Minister speaking with all the authority of someone who knows just how difficult these matters are, rather than the criticisms of backbenchers who had only run their own constituency office. It was a full day’s session operating under usual rules, rather than the hybrid parliament of the past year and a half. This meant that MPs could intervene on speeches, amid the normal hubbub of the Chamber. So what did we learn from the government in today’s session?

It is very easy to dismiss Wednesday’s recall of Parliament as a pointless exercise in handwringing that sums up the way most MPs approach foreign policy. There will certainly be plenty of frustrating hindsight on offer from politicians who haven’t taken a blind bit of notice of Afghanistan right up until the point where they scent an opportunity to bash the government. But there are also important questions to be answered that cannot wait for the normal return of the Commons in September. The first is whether there is any likelihood of British and NATO troops returning to the country.

Is the new normal here to stay? For the sake of our parliamentary democracy, let's hope not.  There is little doubt that holding the Government to account has been made harder by the imposition of restrictions during the pandemic. During the Covid crisis, politicians have been too keen to treat parliament as a normal workplace; the truth is that it isn't and never will be.  If ever there was a good excuse for an 'us versus them' rule exemption, surely it would have been to honour the public by ensuring scrutiny and pushback against the Government removing people’s liberties so easily. Instead, parliamentary proceedings have taken the hybrid form of in-person and Zoom proceedings. This is an unhappy compromise for which we are all worse off.

Things are looking tight this morning for the government’s vote on aid spending. Ministers were hoping that springing the vote on rebels at the last minute might help to peel away some softer MPs, and there's a list doing the rounds this morning of 14 backbenchers who’ve said they are supporting a compromise which would mean the government committing to restoring the 0.7 per cent target when economic conditions improve, using OBR forecasts to gauge when that is.

Graham Brady has been re-elected as chairman of the 1922 Committee of Tory backbenchers. Brady, who has been chair since 2010, saw off a strong challenge from the former minister and whip Heather Wheeler. Brady’s victory is a sign of the mood on the Tory backbenches. Wheeler’s supporters argued that Brady had been too public in his criticisms of the government’s approach to lockdown. That Brady won despite having voted against the government multiple times is a sign that Tory MPs are not in a particularly deferential mood towards No. 10 and that they want someone independent-minded to represent them. Several MPs told me they were voting for Brady because they knew he would be unafraid to deliver tough messages to No. 10.

Update: Commons speaker Lindsay Hoyle has announced that a vote on the aid spending amendment has not been selected. Hoyle says the amendment is out of the scope of the current bill, meaning Boris Johnson will avoid a potentially difficult vote on the issue – for now. Hoyle suggested the government should give MPs an opportunity for a vote at a later date on restoring the foreign aid pledge to 0.7 per cent of gross national income. As preparations get underway in Downing Street for this week's G7 summit, trouble is brewing in the House of Commons. The government is facing a potential defeat on a vote it didn't want to have: the cut to the foreign aid budget.