Freedom of speech

“I think that the revelation that [Bercow] voted remain, actually, I was a bit surprised, because we had been told privately that we thought he was sympathetic to our cause, but it’s after the referendum, [and] I don’t think that I’ve seen any evidence that the way he has voted has influenced the way he has behaved in the chamber."

Whittingdale's actual words.

Ah, found it now. You didn't say it was a precis.

In terms of Bercow's remain vote, I don't see that as breaching impartiality. He obviously will have his own views on many (all) matters and I can't see that it's a problem if we know what the are. If there is no clear evidence of bias in his refereeing of Brexit debates, that's the end of the matter in my book. But the Trump speech was different. An invitation to speak is in the gift of the speakers and the Lord Chamberlain, but I've always understood, and all I've read supports the view, that the speakers are meant to ensure they are reflecting the views of their respective houses before they make decisions of that sort.

Well there you go , I found the quote very easily - sorry Ankers looking for another fake news story were you?

I have had to look up what precis means.

Where do I find such things?

While I am about it, I had not really heard of Hansard before either.
Is that a totally reliable source? I presume it is? And where is that kept[I am not brilliant at googling].
Are there sources that posters regularly look at daily that are not easily available?

Rigby46. When a poster readily admits to things, then alarm bells ring for myself and others. I seem to behind the curve in some respects. As another poster says, I got there in the end or words to that effect.

No , Hansard is not reliable at all. Ankers pull the other one

If Hansard is not reliable why is it used as the true record of HoC business - a team of reporters take the speeches down verbatim.

If Hansard is not a reliable source then I don't know what is really.

Here you are Ankers
Members’ words are recorded by Hansard reporters and then edited to remove repetitions and obvious mistakes but without taking away from the meaning. The text of debates in the Commons and Lords is published online during the day - a speech is made available about three hours after a Member has finished delivering it.

The paper version of Hansard is produced by 6 am the following day. Bound final versions follow, proofread to eliminate any errors that may have occurred in the original.

Not edited to change any meaning politically, only proof-reading type of editing and an extremely useful and accessible source of information which I rarely access since I retired.

ps didn't you do endless precis at school Ankers; that is not what happens with Hansard, rigorous precis by an under-qualified person is not what happens as an omission could change the whole emphasis of the debate.

I think we should stop trying to educate Ankers I rather think she knows exactly how many beans make five and exactly what Hansard is.

I never did 1 precis as far as I can remember Jalima. Though my memory of school days is not what it might be.

Hansard is totally reliable. Wonderful.

rig got it in one.

right through primary and high school .... well, nearly all the way through Ankers

Rigby I think if you try to peddle Ankers False Information then someone needs to put it right, especially if she did not know.
Thanks Welshwife you put it very succinctly.

If you could be bothered to plough your way through it (Hansard I mean).
I wouldn't choose to unless I had to.

I find Hansard very interesting. I check it quite regularly when debates about subjects or MPs I am interested in are drawn to my attention by this website.

www.theyworkforyou.com/

I get emails sent whenever NHS is mentioned in debates, either in the house or even written responses.
I also track my MP.

online I hope, not physically

Yes, it is useful if you want to follow something up.

Oh yes, Jalima. Much easier online.

Here you are, ankers, hansard.parliament.uk/ a link to Hansard, a totally reliable source to exactly what everyone said each day in Parliament.

However it may take you so long to read it all that you have no time left for eating, sleeping or posting on Gransnet.

Actually, I haven't looked to see what mine is up to lately, must take a peek.

Points of order are often very illuminating. This from 9th, the last day they sat.

"On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I cannot quite believe that I am having to raise Concentrix in the House again, but after the scandal that broke around that company HMRC announced that it would never again use a private provider to deal with tax credits, especially in relation to error and fraud. But today the Government have issued a written ministerial statement saying that they will transfer tax credit error and fraud to the Department for Work and Pensions and will seek an external provider to do so. That is a disgraceful U-turn on Government policy as stated to the House. Can you do anything to ensure that a Minister comes to the House and explains why that U-turn has happened, so that they can be held properly to account?"

There is so much going on in parliament that, if it wasn't for Hansard, we would not know about u-turns like this.
It's one of the usual, doing it at a break and hoping nobody notices.

I wonder how many were present at the time.
I don't watch Parliament very often but if I see anything I'm often struck by how few MPs are actually in there debating.

I know they have other duties of course, but even when we think it is of prime importance it is not full except on extremely rare occasions.

I think that aswell when I watch it, Jalima. Even the Brexit votes had very few people listening to the debates. I thought it was a waste of time as every one had made up their minds already.

With relation to Bercow revealing that he voted remain, this was posted today on the latest Mumsnet Westministenders thread:

Wrt Bercow, my Tory MP is one of the deputy speakers. She put a message up on her facebook page on the day of the referendum to tell her constituents that although she usually remains impartial she wanted to let them know that she had voted Leave. I know deputy speaker os a lesser role than speaker, but surely the same rules apply.
Posted by GraceGrape at 9.44 today if you want to find it

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/eu_referendum_2016_/a2852204-Westministenders-Boris-and-The-By-Elections

Nobody appears to be calling for this MP's dismissal despite their disclosure being on Facebook. Which is rather more public than a private meeting with students

NB These Westministenders threads are very good for Remainers; they are full of excellent information and very well informed posters.

I'm not sure about the referendum result as it wasn't strictly politically divided was it, so it was not a choice between supporting one party or another.

It was a personal decision aside from politics.

That seems to be the conclusion most sensible people have come to, Jalima. So why all the screaming about Bercow mentioning it, 7 months after the referendum and in private?