9th July 2026
The Farage stunt by-election in constitutional context
*
“Suppose They Gave a War and Nobody Came”
– a 1960s slogan and a title of a 1970 film
*
The current leader of the Reform Party has resigned his parliamentary seat so as to force a by-election in his Clacton constituency, in which he will stand for re-election.
This is, of course, a stunt.
*
For a few wonderful hours yesterday it seemed we might have had the constitutional excitement of this by-election either being delayed or denied.
This is because – somewhat oddly – a Member of Parliament cannot directly resign their seat.
This is a constitutional fiction – a daft piece of political-legal make-believe.
The notion is that – like, say, with jury service – being summoned to attend parliament is a civic duty. Indeed, in the past it was a onerous duty which the knights of the shires and the burgers from the boroughs would often not like to do – and would get out from doing if they could.
And so if you were selected for attendance at the Commons then you had to go – at your own expense, in lodgings in that London (well, Westminster), and without payment: a chore not a privilege.
Once a Member of Parliament is returned, the expectation is that they serve out their term.
*
But.
There were – and are – means of a Member of Parliament rendering themself (or being rendered) as disqualified.
The old joke was that lords, lunatics or bankrupts that were exempt.
(Or all three, ho, ho, ho.)
And also exempt were those who were appointed to offices of profit under the Crown.
In fact there is now an entire schedule of exempt offices – a long, long list.
And to maintain the daft fiction, two historic offices were included on the schedule just so Members of Parliament could pretend that they are not actually resigning.
It really is very silly.
*
But what this means is that it is not within the sole power of a Member of Parliament to resign.
Unless they are appointed to a genuine exempt outside job (like being a judge) they have to apply to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (and thereby a government minister) for appointment to one of the make-believe offices.
The convention is that such applications for the Chiltern Hundreds or the Manor of Northstead are accepted.
But that is a mere convention: if the Chancellor of the Exchequer said no, then that decision could not be easily gainsaid.
According to the House of Commons library there have been (at least) two instances of the application being refused:
(Note the almost early appearance there for Nathan Barley.)
*
But even if the application is granted, there is then the distinct and separate question of moving the writ for a by-election, which is a matter for the House of Commons. And, again, it is only by convention that this is usually done promptly.
And so, an MP like Nigel Farage who resigns to fight a by-election can be denied or delayed in two ways: by the government, and by Parliament.
*
Alas, however, the Chancellor of the Exchequer denied us any constitutional fun.
The bin, of course, is joke candidate Count Binface, for all the other main parties said they would not contest this pointless by-election.
This morning the writ was moved – a by-election is likely in August.
*
Farage should be careful: the Brexit referendum of 2016 was itself an election which those who called thought would go one way, but the voters did not vote they way they were “supposed” to.
Also in 2016, there was the example of Boaty McBoatface.
Constituents and voters, like tribunals, do not like being taken for granted.
*
Farage appears to have been adopting political tactics that might have come from S. Baldrick.
Farage has created an embarrassing situation for himself, entirely by himself.
And he will gain no advantage in the the face of the current House of Commons investigation, which can simply resume even if he is re-elected with a “mandate” against a sentient rubbish bin.
In a news interview today, the muddled thinking can be indicated by his party saying the Commons committee is a “kangaroo court” but him also complaining about committee delays that may drag on until October.
That is a mighty slow kangaroo.
*
Of course, complaints of “kangaroo courts” and “witch hunts” by politicians like Farage, Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are often of painfully elaborate but procedurally fair processes, from which they know there is no easy escape or evasion.
That is why the processes have to be rubbished in the most colourful way, in the hope that the easily bored will nod-along.
“Kangaroo court!”
“Witch hunt!”
*
The (lack of) thinking here is also that Farage could somehow head off a further by-election caused by an adverse Commons investigation report (in which the main parties would compete), with this by-election.
But he did not think things through, nor take account of foreseeable risks.
Like other insurgent politicians, he can only think about one chess move ahead.
Now, even if if he wins, he has lost any advantage and instead gained ridicule and discredit.
And he is left to reflect on what could have bin.
(Sorry.)
*
By-elections can have great power in our political system.
The two recent by-elections in the north of England have altered the course of the politics of the United Kingdom.
But this year looks as if there will be a third by-election, if not of great power but of equally great lack-of-power.
For Farage has somehow called a by-election, and nobody came.
***
Comments Policy
This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.
Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated and comments will not be published if irksome, or if they risk derailing the discussion.
More on the comments policy is here.
David, what would be the position if nobody except Nigel Farage stood? I have a vague memory from my long ago employment in local government, that in an uncontested election the single candidate is just declared elected. Does this apply in parliamentary elections too. In which case if Count Binface withdrew it would save the cost of holding this silly election.
I think that is what the returning officer would do – in the olden days, uncontested elections were not uncommon.
There is more than one other candidate already.
Hadn’t realised that a number of others are already standing – just checked and the party names read like something from a 1930’s emulating populist day dream. And Laurence Fox is one of the candidates!
A single candidate gets an unopposed return. This got less and less common over the years and the last Westminster case I can think of was the Armagh by-election in 1954. However unopposed returns continued for the old Northern Ireland Parliament until abolition in 1972 (and possibly even for some of the Assemblies of the 1970s & 1980s).
In the 1986 all fifteen Unionist MPs from Northern Ireland fought by-elections called by resigning in opposition to the Anglo-Irish Agreement. With a pact between them whilst opposing parties were critical of calling the by-elections and not fielding full slates there were nearly four uncontested seats. A Unionist activist changed his name by deed poll to “Peter Barry” (the Republic’s Minister for Foreign Affairs) and stood in all four constituencies on the label “For the Anglo-Irish Agreement”. Despite being a total paper candidate he saved three deposits.
“And nobody came” might also apply to the good people of Clacton who might decide that their time is better spent on the beach than in the polling booth.
Mr Farage secured more than 20,000 votes at the 2024 general election. He will hardly be able to claim support for his conspiracy theory if fewer people turn out for him in the by-election.
By wilfully causing unnecessary expense to the taxpayer is Mr Farage inviting a charge of Misconduct in Public Office? It is expected this by election will cost approximately £200k
I wish we stopped trying to get political opponents arrested – that is part of the problem.
How long does Farage remain the Steward and Bailiff of the said Manor? I’ve previously assumed it would be until the next MP wants out in which case wouldn’t he be ineligible to stand in the by-election?
There was a small Mastodon discussion of a Northern Ireland MP wanting to resign but, despite refusing the appointment for obvious political reasons, it was made anyway. If it’s possible for somebody to be appointed even though they’ve said they’ve refused it would be consistent that they can’t resign the appointment.
Traditionally it was the *appointment* to the office of profit rather than the *holding* of it that vacated the seat. This goes back to the 17th century conflicts between the Crown and Parliament and was a compromise rather than going for what we now call a full separation of powers. So that the Crown, later the Government, had some restraint on its ability to control Parliament through patronage, a constituency had to assent to having a Member with a government job. This led to newly appointed ministers having to fight by-elections with some interesting consequences (e.g. Churchill was one of many to lose & have to find another seat, Gladstone wound up as a Secretary of State outside Parliament because he had fallen out with his patron at Newark and didn’t even seek re-election, in Canada a century ago this month an attempt to delay vacating seats pending a confidence vote in a tight Commons caused an outrage that brought down the newly appointed Meighen government at the end of the King-Byng Affair).
The current disqualification legislation holds a list of incompatible offices (mainly various public sector appointments) and the clause quoted above appears to maintain the distinction between Stewards vacating their seat but being able to be re-elected to it whilst still being a Steward.
The man behind Count Binface, Jon Harvey, is a comedian and political satirist who has written for shows such as The Thick of It and Have I Got News for You.
I am not the first to make this observation by any means: Volodymyr Zelensky was also a comedian before becoming a wartime leader of remarkable determination and skill.
It’s a useful reminder that the ability to perform, communicate and connect with people can sometimes translate into unexpected forms of leadership.
“And he will gain no advantage in the the face of the current House of Commons investigation, which can simply resume even if he is re-elected with a “mandate” against a sentient rubbish bin.”
This is according to someone on Bluesky, so pinch of salt, but….
Paragraph 40 of the Procedural Protocol to the MPs’ Code of Conduct says that the investigation can resume anyway, even if he loses:
“40. If Parliament is dissolved or the Member otherwise ceases to be a Member while an
investigation is in progress, the Commissioner will suspend their investigation until the
member is re-elected. If the Member is not returned to Parliament, the Commissioner
will decide if it is appropriate and proportionate to resume their investigation”
Which, to me, seems like the best outcome of all!
There is nothing in that (of which I was already aware) which contradicts my point.
That’s true – I wasn’t trying to contradict you though, just adding further info.
Thank you for this (dreadful jokes and all!). I hadn’t understood the rationale about applying for the (“exempt” post as steward of) the Chiltern Hundreds or the Manor of Northstead, and am glad after all these years to have had that explained. Your analogy with jury service is a good one, and it always intrigued me when local judges (other than the Recorder) were called up for jury service.
Maybe the CEO of ReformUK Ltd has had enough of parliament as doing the job properly is beyond him. Maybe he’s hoping to be deposed and not have to do any more constituency work.
I’d be fascinated to know how George Grenville introduced a Bill five years after his death.
There is, of course, the odd case of Gerry Adams who would never acknowledge anything to do with Parliament, never mind applying for some non-existing office when he was finished with it.
“I’ve found something better to do; good luck lads.”
The Gerry Adams case was bizarre and a rare time when this got much attention outside of the usual circles. Adams’s statements that he hadn’t sought or accepted the office created a lot of confusion but clearly somebody realised that it was more important for him to be eligible to stand for the Dáil at the looming general election than to spend years stuck as a Westminster MP demanding the law be changed just to allow him to resign directly so in the end everyone accepted that he had been appointed and taken to his desired destination if not in his preferred vehicle. The only lasting change was a modification of the wording of the Commons order for a writ (and cannily this was first used on a couple of less controversial vacancies) so that it now referred to being appointed to the office rather than accepting it.
The Manor of Northstead is a 1954 comedy play by the British writer William Douglas Home. It is a sequel to his 1947 hit The Chiltern Hundreds. The title refers to the Manor of Northstead.