ChatterBank2 mins ago
John Bercow
39 Answers
I've just read something quite astonishing. Apparently There is an arrangement that none of the main parties should out a candidate up against him because he is speaker. If this is true it is totally Undemocratic. I looked at the candidates and there is a UKIP candidate and a Green candidate and Bercow who will probably not be involved in his own campaign because he can't lose. What does this say for the People of Buckingham.
Yes, I know I will get a torrent of left wingers on this forum talking about the Tory Toffs in Buckingham but this "unwritten agreement" is so wrong. Did the same happen in Goerballs Micks constituancies?
Yes, I know I will get a torrent of left wingers on this forum talking about the Tory Toffs in Buckingham but this "unwritten agreement" is so wrong. Did the same happen in Goerballs Micks constituancies?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lindapalmara. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The Tories were hoist by their own petard over Bercow's election.
They brought down the previous speaker Martin over his role in the expenses scandal. But they were a minority in that Parliament. So that meant they would never get a Conservative Speaker of their choice.
If they had waited a few months until after the election, they would have ended up with their own preferred candidate. Instead, they went for a short term victory ousting Martin and they had Bercow foisted on them. And he was re-elected after the General Election.
They brought down the previous speaker Martin over his role in the expenses scandal. But they were a minority in that Parliament. So that meant they would never get a Conservative Speaker of their choice.
If they had waited a few months until after the election, they would have ended up with their own preferred candidate. Instead, they went for a short term victory ousting Martin and they had Bercow foisted on them. And he was re-elected after the General Election.
Douglas Carswell MP (uKIP, former Tory) wrote this in the Daily Telegraph in 2013. He appears to be sYing Bercow is not biased toward anyone, but he puts the Institution of Parliament first. It sounds plausible:
// John Bercow is not biased – and it's a myth that he's loathed on the Tory backbenches
Speaker Bercow has been upsetting some of the more sensitive souls in the House of Commons. The poor dears!
Ministers turn up in the Commons to announce a series of closures, without bringing the list. Then Mr Speaker barks at them.
MPs given the chance to grill ministers about government policy, instead make a childish points about Labour policy. Bercow ticks them off.
Hang on a second.
How dare a minister turn up to make an announcement that will impact the lives of thousands, without bothering to bring the detail? How demeaning that an MP should ever ask a toady question, intended to gain favour with the whips?
Politicians' pet pundits might sneer at the Speaker. The rest of the country should cheer him each time he ruffles feathers.
Don't misunderstand me. John Bercow's politics are not mine. And his wife's antics strike me as bizarre. But as Speaker of the House of Commons, he deserves support from all those who think Parliament ought to do better.
Thanks to Bercow, the Commons is starting to count once more.
Backbenchers can table Urgent Questions, keeping ministers on their toes. Bercow selects amendments intended to test the Government's position. He has speeded up the tempo of debate; experienced ministers are no longer able to hide behind long winded waffle.
Perhaps the most facile charge against the Speaker is that he's biased.
The whole point of having a House of Commons is that it holds the government to account. The Speaker's job is to make sure it does its job. In doing so, he is – by definition – going to uphold the authority of the Commons against those on the government benches. With Tory ministers sprawled across those government benches, that means he'll often be admonishing a Tory.
So why do we keep being told that the Speaker is partisan? Precisely because he changing the cosy Westminster way of doing things.
For too long, our legislature has been a useless facade. All the important decisions have been carved up by "the usual channels", the system that gave us the old MPs expenses regime. The backbenchers have been reduced to being little more than cheerleaders for party leaders.
Bercow is helping restore purpose to Parliament. He is lifting the legislature off its knees.
Ministers may grumble. Whips will whine – and brief the press. That should reassure the rest of us that Bercow is doing something right.
Incidentally, it is a myth that Bercow is loathed on the Tory benches. If the front bench ever put his authority to a vote, the backbenchers would support him. And the grandees know it, which is yet another reason they can't stand him. //
// John Bercow is not biased – and it's a myth that he's loathed on the Tory backbenches
Speaker Bercow has been upsetting some of the more sensitive souls in the House of Commons. The poor dears!
Ministers turn up in the Commons to announce a series of closures, without bringing the list. Then Mr Speaker barks at them.
MPs given the chance to grill ministers about government policy, instead make a childish points about Labour policy. Bercow ticks them off.
Hang on a second.
How dare a minister turn up to make an announcement that will impact the lives of thousands, without bothering to bring the detail? How demeaning that an MP should ever ask a toady question, intended to gain favour with the whips?
Politicians' pet pundits might sneer at the Speaker. The rest of the country should cheer him each time he ruffles feathers.
Don't misunderstand me. John Bercow's politics are not mine. And his wife's antics strike me as bizarre. But as Speaker of the House of Commons, he deserves support from all those who think Parliament ought to do better.
Thanks to Bercow, the Commons is starting to count once more.
Backbenchers can table Urgent Questions, keeping ministers on their toes. Bercow selects amendments intended to test the Government's position. He has speeded up the tempo of debate; experienced ministers are no longer able to hide behind long winded waffle.
Perhaps the most facile charge against the Speaker is that he's biased.
The whole point of having a House of Commons is that it holds the government to account. The Speaker's job is to make sure it does its job. In doing so, he is – by definition – going to uphold the authority of the Commons against those on the government benches. With Tory ministers sprawled across those government benches, that means he'll often be admonishing a Tory.
So why do we keep being told that the Speaker is partisan? Precisely because he changing the cosy Westminster way of doing things.
For too long, our legislature has been a useless facade. All the important decisions have been carved up by "the usual channels", the system that gave us the old MPs expenses regime. The backbenchers have been reduced to being little more than cheerleaders for party leaders.
Bercow is helping restore purpose to Parliament. He is lifting the legislature off its knees.
Ministers may grumble. Whips will whine – and brief the press. That should reassure the rest of us that Bercow is doing something right.
Incidentally, it is a myth that Bercow is loathed on the Tory benches. If the front bench ever put his authority to a vote, the backbenchers would support him. And the grandees know it, which is yet another reason they can't stand him. //
One line in this article grabbed my attention
even Labour MP's.......will admit in privvate that Bercow is a poor Speaker
http://
even Labour MP's.......will admit in privvate that Bercow is a poor Speaker
http://
This was not a good example of Speaker behaviour:
http://
http://
I haven't time to read all the relies to you Linda, as I have just arrived home from Cornwall, but the tradition of not opposing the Speaker is well established. There is nothing whatsoever "undemocratic" about this arrangement.
If you want to vent your ire at somebody, you should perhaps try Mr Farage, as he stood against the Speaker in 2010 and his party is doing the same again.
Are UKIP so very desperate that they should break protocol on this issue ? The same goes for others thinking of opposing Bercow. I can understand UKIP motives but I am finding it impossible to work out the Greens tactics here.
As Bercow was a Tory MP, I am sure you won't be able to label this post as a "lefty" torrent !
If you want to vent your ire at somebody, you should perhaps try Mr Farage, as he stood against the Speaker in 2010 and his party is doing the same again.
Are UKIP so very desperate that they should break protocol on this issue ? The same goes for others thinking of opposing Bercow. I can understand UKIP motives but I am finding it impossible to work out the Greens tactics here.
As Bercow was a Tory MP, I am sure you won't be able to label this post as a "lefty" torrent !
^^ yes the Speaker has a casting vote in the event of a tie, but he will always cast it in favour of the governmnt of the day.
The speakers consituency has parlimentary surgeries just like any other constituecy.
The people of Buckingham can write to their MP on matters that concern them and get a reply, the reply may not be from Bercow though.
The speakers consituency has parlimentary surgeries just like any other constituecy.
The people of Buckingham can write to their MP on matters that concern them and get a reply, the reply may not be from Bercow though.
The same is probably true of cabinet ministers. This is one of the disadvantages of having the executive drawn from the legislature, unlike in the US where the executive are not members of Congress. The only two elected members of the executive are the president and vice president. All other ministers are appointed by the president.
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|