In the debates of late 1648 concerning the king's fate, Vane argued that the Parliament should constitute a government without the king "to make themselves the happiest nation and people in the world." His forceful speech on 2 December suggesting that the king would need to be eliminated as a political force was opposed by others, including Nathaniel Fiennes, who claimed that the concessions the king had made to date were sufficient that an agreement might be reached. Others suggested that rather than dividing the house by opposition to the king, it be divided by separating those who had gained in the war from those who had not, and that financial contributions be made from one group to the other. After an impassioned conciliatory speech by William Prynne, Parliament finally voted on 5 December that the king's concessions were sufficient.