bluewolf
Money List Winner
No, he's supposed to be non-partisan, but has the responsibility of looking after the integrity of the House. He's done his job.
John Bercow - right or wrong?
- Thread starter chrisd
- Start date
No, he's supposed to be non-partisan, but has the responsibility of looking after the integrity of the House. He's done his job.
Not in the past he hasn't so why change now, he's in the wrong imo and I won't change my opinion.
bluewolf
Money List Winner
You don't have too mate. It's what makes the world turn 👍
And just because he hasn't done it before doesn't make it wrong that he has done it this time.
I think it does though and I'd like to know why there seems to be acceptable double standards when it suits?
bluewolf
Money List Winner
So you believe that if someone has done something once, then they should follow the same path every time?
There's no double standards from me. I'd like to see all foreign despots, tyrants, fascists etc banned from addressing the house. I've no issue with political differences, but if you're message is one of intolerance, bigotry, sexism, racism etc etc etc, then I don't believe you should be treated like a welcomed dignitary..
Wrong.
I want him to get his racist, sexist, elitest message to as many people as possible so that everyone gets to see what a despicable thug he is. The more he gets it out there the sooner his own people, who are the only ones who can remove him from office, can shut him down.
And we need more John Bercow's in parliament.
I want him to get his racist, sexist, elitest message to as many people as possible so that everyone gets to see what a despicable thug he is. The more he gets it out there the sooner his own people, who are the only ones who can remove him from office, can shut him down.
And we need more John Bercow's in parliament.
Tashyboy
Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
So John Bercow is there to protect the integrity of the house, that went tits up before he even got the job. If he was protecting the house he would nail the door shut when Corbyn walks up the path ( I would even buy the hammer and nails) , and a few others.
Re one man banning Trump from speaking, how's that supposed to be right. The whole country had a vote on Brexit, teddy got thrown out of the cot and said judges said the Houses of Parliament had to decide. Would like to see the same teddy thrower take John Bercow to court and say the MPs have to decide.
Double standards, they should let him speak and if you don't want to hear him talk grow a pair, get up and walk out.
Re one man banning Trump from speaking, how's that supposed to be right. The whole country had a vote on Brexit, teddy got thrown out of the cot and said judges said the Houses of Parliament had to decide. Would like to see the same teddy thrower take John Bercow to court and say the MPs have to decide.
Double standards, they should let him speak and if you don't want to hear him talk grow a pair, get up and walk out.
Sweep
Journeyman Pro
I think the Speaker is guilty of grandstanding here. If he didn't want Trump to make such an address he could have been done it in a much more subtle way. He did not have to make an announcement and certainly not in the Commons. He most certainly should not have expressed a personal political opinion in doing so.
As I understand it, a State visit does not necessarily include addressing both Houses and I am not even sure such an address was requested, but I may be wrong as constitutional procedures are very complicated.
The Speaker choosing to act in this way is an attempt to embarrass the government and could be seen as swaying government policy. In this regard, quite independently from whether his opinions are seen as right or wrong, his acting in this way cannot be seen as right.
As I understand it, a State visit does not necessarily include addressing both Houses and I am not even sure such an address was requested, but I may be wrong as constitutional procedures are very complicated.
The Speaker choosing to act in this way is an attempt to embarrass the government and could be seen as swaying government policy. In this regard, quite independently from whether his opinions are seen as right or wrong, his acting in this way cannot be seen as right.
Last edited:
Apparently he is one of 3 on a panel who makes this judgement. He was probably a bit premature, grandstanding, but he got it out there. The other two could over rule him but I suspect whilst one may the other would not. If they did he would probably resign, causing more fuss. In parliamentary terms, he has the House with him and so the MP's would stand by him. His weakness is in allowing the Chinese Premier to speak. If you allow him then you have pretty much opened the door to anyone.
Incidentally, the Speaker is neutral in terms of people within the House, Lab, Con, Lib, SNP etc. He will say in this instance that he is protecting the integrity of the House and is still politically neutral. You can argue that one both ways.
Incidentally, the Speaker is neutral in terms of people within the House, Lab, Con, Lib, SNP etc. He will say in this instance that he is protecting the integrity of the House and is still politically neutral. You can argue that one both ways.
Beezerk
Money List Winner
There will be no MP's left in Westminster going by Bercow's logic.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
I would be surprised if Bercow hadn't taken full advice on this as he takes his role very seriously. I suspect he has a duty to the HoC - to prevent the HoC being used.
As far as I am concerned the UK would just be being used for Trumps ends - and those ends are his only - using the UK as a vanity project to bolster his popularity and detract from what he is actually doing - 'look - the UK recognises and agrees that what I am doing is right and valid' - he will spin, spin, spin and then lie about us.
And he uses us further to undermine the EU with his goal - with Bannon - of fracturing the EU so he can strike individual deals with the EU nations. Not caring the strains and arguments that are created between European counties as a result - and as they have to compete with each other for trade deals with the US.
Last edited:
sawtooth
Tour Winner
Anyone would think that we are dealing with another Saddam Hussein.
Trump was elected fair and square. Half the electorate in a free, civilised society chose him as their leader. The high anti-Trump feeling especially over here is baffling.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
You really honestly find it baffling? In that case I suggest you go watch some of the US politics programmes (you can get clips on their Youtube channels) and you'll hear what he is up to and how baffled and horrified they are - and why.
Last edited:
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
But they voted him in, they chose him.
Sweep
Journeyman Pro
I take your point on him potentially "using" the UK, but the rest of your post is just objecting to him speaking based on your political opinion being opposed to his.
If the Houses of Commons and Lords cannot hear political opinion, then what do they do all day?
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
Democracy certainly didn't shine last night.
The devolved nations were unable to put there case across in the Brexit debate.
Speaker allowed SNP MP's 3 minutes in a 7 hour debate. One Tory MP allowed more time to state his case than the combined group of NI, Wales and Scotland.
Salmond had a right go at the Speaker and got 'slapped down'.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Those 2 may rule over countries with appalling human rights records, but there is hope (and occasionally actual progress!) of reform.
In Trump's case, he is introducing/has introduced legislation that reduces/restricts 'human rights' and is arguably (currently deemed to be) unconstitutional!
So while China and Kuwait may be progress forwards, Trump's action is definitely a retrograde step!
As Speaker, Bercow is quite entitled to express his opinion/decision on this particular matter! The actual State Visit is a completely separate matter, not any real business of The Speaker - though there are Commons debates, both for and against it, scheduled!
Crazyface
Tour Winner
THIS ! End of.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
So someone in the political world shows some morals and common sense and gets shot down because of it
Trump shouldn't be made to feel welcome just because he is POTUS - he should earn that respect and his views and comments and actions whilst becoming President imo don't earn that respect and the speaker said exactly that - he is a racist sexist bigot and has displayed that attitude before his campaign , during his campaign and after becoming President.
Well done Mr Bercow - it's a shame your kind are too rare within the government
Trump shouldn't be made to feel welcome just because he is POTUS - he should earn that respect and his views and comments and actions whilst becoming President imo don't earn that respect and the speaker said exactly that - he is a racist sexist bigot and has displayed that attitude before his campaign , during his campaign and after becoming President.
Well done Mr Bercow - it's a shame your kind are too rare within the government
People are mixing some things up here. Bercow, nor anyone else, is not stopping Trump coming over here. Nor is he stopping him talking in various places. All he is doing is stopping him talking in the House itself, in either of the two main chambers. That is an honour, it is not handed out willy nilly. Trump will come across and be feted as the elected President of a major ally but it doesn't mean we extend every privelege at this early stage.
Similar threads
