Freedom of speech

Annie you asked who Bercow should have consulted. One of his jobs is to speak for Parliament when required, but he is meant to ensure he has the general support of Parliament before he does so. He should have made some effort to sound out MPs and certainly should have consulted the other key holders.

My mistake djen he did not need to consult MPs
POGS is right, that Bercow should have consulted with the Speaker of the House of Lords and the Lord Chamberlain before issuing a statement.
He also told students how he had voted in the referendum when he is supposed to maintain strict impartiality.

I still don't think he should stand down but acknowledge that he has made errors - 'lessons should be learned'.

Gracesgran2

'Certainly the far right capitalist conservatives will love having a man with a net worth of £150 million. You really can understand why he has the politics stance he does and do we really think he will be even-handed with his extreme (but nicely spoken) views.

Inverted snobbery can say as much about the character of the person who thinks as such than those they despise.

I think there are very good candidates for the role of Speaker as both Labours Lynsey Hoyle and Conservative Eleanor Laing have both done a brilliant job as Deputies. I have never seen the 3rd Deputy, Labour Natascha Engle take her place.

Out of the other 'possible' candidates of Rees Mogg and Chris Bryant Rees Mogg beats Bryant hands down as he is accepted as having an excellent knowledge of Parliamentary business and protocol. If Rees Mogg can get Labour MP Jess Phillips to like him, which she does, I think he will do alright.

Oh I do despise far right capitalists Pogs. What does that say about me? I am sure you have your own views but to me they increase - and have done more and more over the last few decades - the poverty of the low paid worker, the destitution and homelessness hitting this country and the divisiveness that we see daily. The use their unearned wealth - I have no problem with anyone earning fairly however much it is - they use their unearned wealth to avoid the day to day living conditions others have to bear and then condemn them for being and living they way they are. Jacob Rees-Mogg is an example of those on the right of the Conservative Party who not only manages to be an anachronism but at the same time the worst example of what those with his views who have managed to carve out a protected life for themselves while being in a position of power that leaves others accused of deserving their poverty.

No POGS I have no problem with people earning their wealth if they understand that everyone cannot necessarily do so too or even have a reasonable share while those amassing obscene capital growth behave the way they do, but I do have a problem with the likes of this man.

... and what do I think about those who praise such people - I find they are merely obsequiously to those in power and disregarding of the lives of others.

Chris Bryant before Rees Mogg,mbut Rees Mogg does amuse me. He speaks so slowly though, PMQ would have to be extended to give the house Rees Mogg time

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/who_is_jacob_rees_mogg_1_4883424

Thanks for the link Jen. It is high time the blinkers were pulled off and the Rees-Mogg myth exposed.

Jen, Jalima - link to a piece by a constitutional law expert who says Bercow should have consulted Parliament. That is is indeed his job. But the campaign to sack him is over the top.
www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/john-bercows-views-on-donald-trump-may-resonate-but-it-s-not-his-job-to-express-them-vernon-bogdanor-a3460186.html

For every legal view there will be an equal and opposite one - that is how the law works and without taking this to court we cannot know if this is correct Fitzy. I also notice the 'legal' opinion strays into political opinion.

On the other side of the coin should a small (very small, but loud and supported by some of the right-wing press) cohort of the right of the Conservatives have had the right to keep trying to unseat him ever since he was made Speaker?

Thank you for that link Jen --- Rees-Bunce made a good entry!!!

'Speakers must be politically impartial. Therefore, on election the new Speaker must resign from their political party and remain separate from political issues even in retirement. However, the Speaker will deal with their constituents' problems like a normal MP.'

I am not sure if this is law or convention but it is what it says on Parliament's website. I suspect Bercow has contravened convention.

www.parliament.uk/business/commons/the-speaker/the-role-of-the-speaker/role-of-the-speaker/

It is interesting that this thread began about Bercow denying freedom of speech to Trump and now questions whether Bercow has freedom of speech. By convention, people in his difficult but prestigious and well paid job do not.

If only we could bring back Betty. Graet lady.

You would have to argue what constitutes a speaker being politically impartial Cunco, just as everyone has on here. I'm afraid I do not share your opinion of 'Betty'.

Graces it's not true that for every legal view there is an equal and opposite. Lawyers agree what the law is most of the time. In this case I haven't seen any Constitutional law expert support Bercow. I would like to see something, but I think they will have their work cut out.

God forbid we should have a speaker who has a sense of humour , who has the respect of backbenchers, who speaks out against a self confessed sex sbuser, who supports modernising some of the centuries old stuffy tradition

So he said he voted to remain, that referendum was last year, will there have to be a second because we now know how the speaker voted .

For every legal view there will be an equal and opposite one

So not true.

I didn't know Bercow was the grandson of Romanian Jews and he is the first Jewish speaker of the house

God forbid we should ever have an impartial speaker who understands his job.

I'd like to know what Keir Starmer thinks if Bercow's comments.
Does anyone know?
As he was the DPP until the last election, he would know a bit about the law.

of, not if.

GGM: I would have thought 'must resign from their political party and remain separate from political issues even in retirement' meant to remain separate from political issues but then, I am not a lawyer.

This is a factsheet from UK Parliament about the role of the Speaker:

www.parliament.uk/about/how/guides/factsheets/members-elections/m02/

It includes the following about impartiality:

'The Speaker must be above party political controversy and must be seen to be completely impartial in all public matters. All sides in the House rely on the Speaker's disinterest, and understand that he or she must stand aside from controversy.'

To me, that is self-explanatory. Of course, if John Bercow would like to change the rules and conventions of his job, he could make proposals to those that appointed him.

That sounds like a cut and dried case for anyone who doesn't think that Bercow should have remained quiet last week on the subject of Trump.

If the speaker had spoken out saying he was really looking forward to Trump speaking to Parliament and if he'd told the students he'd voted Brexit, I wonder quite how many pearls would be being clutched by those doing so on this thread? I will be very surprised if he is voted against - what is really going on is much point scoring by those MPs who have had a grudge against him for years - he also faced some pretty nasty anti-Semitic and remarks about his lack of the 'right' sort of education when he first became Speaker.

I'm not sure who exactly 'pearl clutchers' are supposed to be, but there would have been howls of outrage if the speaker had said either of the things you suggest, Rigby, from all and sundry.

This is all so irrelevant. Something like 12 Tories have signed the letter, including that idiot Rees Mogg. The Tories hate Bercow -common knowledge - nothing like Tory revenge and hate they are past masters at it. Bercow apparently allows too many emergency debates that hold the government to account, and they don't like it - any chance to cut out accountability will be taken. Backbencher s are called to speak more than the government likes as well.

Hard cheese I say.