Parliament is again the centre of attention as we consider who our next Speaker will be. I have decided which will not be getting my vote but I have not yet decided who will get it.

Tradition suggests (but does not dictate) that a Conservative should take the post. Sir Alan Haselhurst, my choice ten years ago, is an excellent Chairman and a safe pair of hands, but is he too late? I have worked under Sir George Young on the Standards Committee. He would be acceptable without being exciting.

John Bercow, a Tory with more support on the Labour benches than his own, would be an interesting choice. He has moved from the right wing libertarian to liberal egalitarian over ten years, a competent if eccentric character. A radical step too far?

On Labour’s side Margaret Beckett was a very good Leader of the House and would push for reforms. But has she been a minister too recently to be attractive to backbenchers?

These are the four I am considering. Of the others, Anne Widdecombe would be temporary and has a ‘celebrity’ streak unbecoming in a Speaker. Frank Field is too dry and may struggle. The others do not have what it takes to be a modern Speaker in an outward-looking Parliament.

The Speaker must be a friend to backbenchers whilst acknowledging the Government’s duty to govern. He or she must now also be the voice of the public on the way we conduct ourselves.

As I have said elsewhere, change in our democracy must come. Parliament must be a party to that change, not exercising power merely for the sake of it. Giving up power is like breaking the habit of a lifetime or, in Westminster’s case, a millennium. It’s like giving up smoking: very difficult and stressful to do, but making us all healthier once it is done.