Speaker Bercow is not royalty. Unlike them, he was elected on merit by his peers. His office is entitled to respect and he is entitled to respect as the best Speaker for decades.
In episode 38 of the Mail’s malicious anti-Speaker attack, they ludicrously describe the Speaker as ‘imperious’ and Mark Pritchard MP as ‘mild-mannered’ - precisely the reverse of the truth. John Bercow was never the Mail’s candidate for the job. They attacked him before he was elected, when he was elected, after he was elected and before and after he was re-elected.
Their banshee whining is because they believe he is left wing and intelligent – the antithesis of a Mail reader. Not once have they dented his growing reputation as the best reforming Speaker ever.
He has succeeded superbly in protecting the feeble rights of backbenchers against the overweening power of the Executive. Contriving to call a record number of urgent, oral and topical questions has liberated backbenchers and multiplied our chances of holding the Executive to account.
No Speaker can increase parliamentary time but John Bercow by repeated imprecations, body language and occasional light mockery has reduced the time wasting verbal Polyfilla emitted by self-indulgent boring backbenchers. Last Monday a near record 23 oral questions were called. It’s ironic that Thursday's ludicrous petulance arouse from Pritchard’s failure to be called at Business Questions. In pre-Bercow days it was a rarity for everyone to be called at Business Questions. Now it’s routine – entirely thanks to him.
The Mail has been ringing MPs to find supporters for their lynch mob attacks. Only Former Speaker Boothroyd has obliged by having a go at John Bercow’s simple attire. Strange coming from Betty who was the first Speaker to throw away the traditional wig. If fancy dress makes a good Speaker, Speaker Michael Martin would have succeeded. Embarrassingly his court dress did not protect him from his collapsing authority.
John Bercow is leading many other reforms of our cumbersome antiquated parliamentary procedure. He has boldy innovated. History will divide Speakers into two eras - pre and post Bercow.
The Mail’s sneers will not make a footnote in history.
Of course not, Kay Tie. But the pendulums swing from one bad extreme to another.
Posted by: Paul Flynn | January 17, 2011 at 11:53 PM
"After Baby P , social workers are probably erring on the side of caution. Who can blame them?"
We all can. It's not "erring on the side of caution" to lie and commit perjury, nor for the courts to allow this to continue.
I accept that social work does not have the necessary level of respect, and that this can be a vicious spiral (only poorly-educated lazy people become social workers because it is low-status work). But there are innocent families being smashed up because the authorities allow this situation to persist.
Posted by: Kay Tie | January 17, 2011 at 11:49 AM
In my Judgement neither Wetherill nor Betty Boothroyd manged the reforms that Bercow is achieving. Betty had her merits following the timid Wetherill but she was too fond of the trappings of office.
Posted by: Paul Flynn | January 17, 2011 at 09:30 AM
If there is any group who can never win in today's world it's social workers. When dreadful violence takes place in families it's not the perpetrators who are blamed but their social workers for not stopping it. After Baby P , social workers are probably erring on the side of caution. Who can blame them?
I know nothing about the case in the article. I am sure the local MP/councillor will investigate.
Posted by: Paul Flynn | January 17, 2011 at 09:26 AM
"Quite why JB should arouse such venom among Tories is a mystery"
Pomposity, for a start.
Posted by: Kay Tie | January 16, 2011 at 11:00 PM
It is strange how comments often seem to not really relate to the post at all.
John Bercow is not left wing, but he is intelligent. It is the Mail who think he is left wing, not Paul Flynn.
Quite why JB should arouse such venom among Tories is a mystery - it may well be that he has upset one senior Tory too many - having stood up to both IDS and Michael "Something of the Night" Howard, defying a three line whip (after which he resigned from the front bench) on one occasion; or perhaps it's just anti-semitism; or maybe the fact that everyone else thinks he's a reasonable person.
All in all I think this article is probably rather accurate, and is well written. Thanks Paul.
Posted by: Nils Boray | January 16, 2011 at 10:38 PM
Paul, have you see another of Christopher Booker's reports on the evil acts of social workers?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8262049/A-mothers-fall-causes-her-to-lose-her-child.html
We discussed this topic before, and I was shocked to discover that these injustices are not journalistic hype. So my question is: what is being done about it? Do these victims have to go to the ECJ to get justice, or are our lawmakers - you and your colleagues - going to make some law and put a stop to it?
Posted by: Kay Tie | January 16, 2011 at 10:14 PM
"left wing and intelligent"
An oxymoron. After WW2 the intellectual firepower was with the Left. Now there's not a single thinker I can recall on the Left who has any intellect. All the thinking is with the 'right' (which is what idiots on the Left call neo-liberals).
Posted by: Kay Tie | January 16, 2011 at 09:42 PM
"Unlike them, he was elected him on merit by his peers. His office is entitled to respect and he is entitled to respect as the best Speaker for decades."
Snort!
He's not a patch on Betty Boothroyd or Bernard Wetherill.
Posted by: Kay Tie | January 16, 2011 at 09:40 PM
Better still MRB see my posting of a few days ago.
I do not have the appetite for dragging newspapers through the courts even when they repeatedly tell untruths. This is especially galling when reporters do not both to check their fiction with the people that they are attacking. However, lazy journalists cannot be allowed to get away with it. On Sunday, the Wales on Sunday newspaper will print this apology:
"On Boxing Day Wales on Sunday carried an item in its Spin Doctor column claiming that Paul Flynn MP had sold serialisation rights to his book "The Unusual Suspect" to the Mail on Sunday. We would like to make clear that Mr Flynn played no part in negotiating the serial rights and received no income from the Mail on Sunday for those rights. We apologise for any offence caused."
Posted by: Paul Flynn | January 16, 2011 at 09:05 PM
Read the apology in Wales on Sunday today. This claim has been made three times by them. It's still untrue.
Posted by: Paul Flynn | January 16, 2011 at 09:03 PM
"left wing and intelligent –the antithesis of a Mail reader."
strange then how some self-regarding politicians choose to pitch their memoirs to this very same readership
I smell cant
Posted by: mrb | January 16, 2011 at 08:59 PM