Freedom of speech

Bercow has compromised the objectivity of the role of Speaker of the House and has certainly spoken aginst free speech in abusing his position to 'ban' Trump.

He has always been a mischievous and capricious choice of Speaker. The left voted him in to vex the right as, though he was a Conservative hard liner he 'crossed the floor' in spirit in opposing Conservative measures.

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about him:-

"John Simon Bercow (born 19 January 1963) is a British politician who has been the Speaker of the House of Commons since June 2009. Prior to his election to Speaker, he was a member of the Conservative Party. A former hardline right-winger who moderated his views after becoming an MP and at one time was rumoured to be likely to defect to the Labour Party, Bercow's election to the Speaker's chair depended heavily on the backing of other parties, and was deeply unpopular with many of his former colleagues."

I am not speaking as a supporter of Trump when I say that Bercow has, in my view, overstepped the mark with his words to the House.

I think it reasonable to critcise a man who thinks women are on this earth for him to a use. Who can defend this ? Should our daughters and grandsughters be subjected to these men and do we explain we accept his like because he is the president of a country not the milkman/postman/teacher /priest

So disappointed that our parliament has come to this, not that I am a Trump fan, but he is the elected head of the US, represents the views of large numbers of Americans and indeed a fair number throughout the world. Okay, some people do not agree with his blustering and style of change but we should uphold free speech and not prevent him putting his arguments forward, at least they can then be challenged within the right environment. This should not be done in the media who sensationalise everything or by populists who probably have good intentions but are not privy to full facts and often apply the media feeds to their own localised understanding rather than a greater global understanding. A good example has been the anti Trump marches which. demonstrate this well, there are far far worse things happening in the world worthy of a good protest but the media do not find this 'tasty meat' and so they continue. Donald Trump is perfect for the media he is loud, brash, in your face, probably not the most intellectually gifted, his policy on visas are no different to many countries especially in mainly Muslim countries, its application was temporary however this was not sensationalistic. Muslim ban was newsfeed and the populous swallowed it.
We Brits are told by the FCO not to visit those countries, you cannot get insurance so if that's the case surely there is some issue. Yes Saudi etc were not included, the FCO also do not apply the same 'Do not travel' warnings to this country. Should we protest at the FCO that their travel advice is racist?
Shame on Bercow for bringing his post into disrespect, he is free to have his opinions but not to basically impose his biases on the House of Commons. Shame on Corbin for supporting him in the house.

The 7 banned countries do seem to have been banned[whether they should have been banned or not is a different issue] for somewhat genuine reasons.
He hasnt banned all muslim countries by a long shot.

I'm certainly not 'disagreeing with what I want', GracesGranMK2' because I don't 'want' anything other than proper procedures to be adhered to. As far as I understand Mr Speaker gave his opinion without being asked for it and he is supposed to be politically neutral. Others are far more personally abusive of the man than I choose to be. I only gave the bare bones of my opinion without feeling the necessity to qualify it. Hope that is now okay with you.

Freedom of speech does have limits. What is said has to be within the law,

Hear Hear Joelsnan!

Trump has business interests in the countries he hasn't banned.

GracesGran MK2

"Very few people have been invited to speak in this way and it was high-handed of T May to go ahead with this without consulting others in Parliament. She is not (yet) a dictator; parliamentary democracy is not one person."

I am not aware this has happened , can you provide any evidence of this please.

But the speaker was asked and gave his reply, is it not good that we know what is going on or continue to have decisions made behind closed doors

Who asked the speaker? What do you mean, Annie?

Or he could join Gransnet. ?

Kim19. No need for you or anyone else to qualify anything if you dont want to.

There are only 4 or 5 regular posters on the news and politics board who demand things.

Thank you Ankers. Was completely unaware of the '4 or 5' you mention Never usually think of myself as naive! Just thought GracesGranMK2 was having a difficult day and decided to respond accordingly. Again, thank you. I don't want to leave GN. Only recently stumbled upon it and sometimes find it decidedly informative.

I would just love for (so-called) President Trump to pitch up at Buckingham Palace and be photographed with the Queen because.....then the world would be able to witness a meeting of the most powerful but boorish & oafish man in the world and the most famous but impeccably dignified woman in the world.

And she's got a 65 year head start on Bully-Boy Trump....

Maizie D

"Bercow has a perfect right to exercise his authority."

Bercow made his speech in response to 'An Early Day Motion' put forward by a Labour MP.

An Early Day Motion :-

EDMs are used to put on record the views of individual MPs or to draw attention to specific events or campaigns. Topics covered by EDMs vary widely.

By attracting the signatures of other MPs, they can be used to demonstrate the level of parliamentary support for a particular cause or point of view.

Neither the Speaker nor Deputy Speakers will sign EDMs as their role requires them to be 'POLITICALLY IMPARTIAL'.

On February 20th there will be a debate on both e.petitions regarding The President of USA's State Visit, for and against! Bercow has shown his thought already by accusing him of 'Racism and Sexism'. How can he possibly 'Chair' those debates IMPARTIALLY.?

Bercow has brought the position of Speaker into question because he has shown a clear lack of 'POLITICAL IMPARTIALITY'.

His speech was not a requirement in response to the Early Day Motion he could have shown restraint but chose to use his position to humiliate the elected President of the USA.

Bercow has ' knowingly ' embarrassed The Government of the UK and that will please many and antagonise others.

but boorish & oafish man in the world

You cannot be serious! Across the world there are many men still more 'boorish and oafish' than Trump!

Oh dear, Mr Bercow spoke a bit too openly, we all know what everyone things about President Trump, he wasnt invited to speak in the House, and may not be expecting to, but perhaps speaking in Westminster Hall, will be an honour for him, and in that, not embarassing the Queen, by him not being invited.
I think this will be a good move towards International relationships, and Heaven knows we need them.
As for Trump, my freedom of speach wont allow me to express myself, might ruin relationships!

Sorry it should read speech!

Sorry it should read speech!

Isn't grovelling to trump so we keep on side embarrassing the country?

Trump has attacked the integrity of the judiciary thereby placing himself above the law. This is unacceptable in any democracy and should not be condoned. I believe the Speaker has made a relevant decision, he hasn't banned him, he just will not allow him to use our Parliament as a platform for his prejudice and lies.

Well said Margs!

PS Personally, I feel this visit will not go ahead. The American Security Service will be too nervous about Trump's safety.

Maizie D

'With regard to 'hypocrisy'; as far as I can make out Aung Sun Suu Kyi spoke to Parliament over three years ago, presumably before the recent crackdown on the Rohingya people. '

"The visit in January was by the Speaker of the Myanmar equivalent of Parliament. He did not address either House, just had a tour, met a few people and attended an official dinner hosted by Bercow in the evening. We don't know if the occasion was used to put pressure on/influence the Myanmar government to improve their treatment of the Rohingya."

You have very little understanding of the Rohingya Muslim genocide do you. This is NOT a recent issue in Burma/Myanmar.

I posted this:-

" 2 weeks ago at the start of PMQ's ( 25/1/17 ) Bercow with his usual smarmy face welcomed the speaker of the Burmese (Myanmar) parliament and a delegation of parliamentarians who are watching on."

My point is Bercow can use his position of Speaker to welcome a government known to be committing atrocities against it's people , yet he uses his position as Speaker to humiliate another stating 'racism and sexism'.

If you think Bercow was meeting the Myanmar/Burmese delegation to 'put pressure' on the government could Bercow not have taken the same position with the USA delegation?

I find it strange that I was recently called a Racist on GN yet I appear to be the only one that finds the hypocrisy of Bercow in fawning over the Myanmar delegation and his measured choice to humiliate a country that has been an ally of ours.