He must answer these non-partisan claims of egregious behaviour
As any MP could tell you, John Bercow is a man who could go into an empty room and start an argument. The Speaker of the House of Commons is (how do I put this?) a complex man.
In the political bear pit of the Commons, he has both his supporters and detractors because, alongside his thin skin, odd behaviour, rages and childlike temper tantrums, he also has the capacity for political intelligence, charm and generosity. However, he stands accused of bullying a number of his staff – very serious for someone holding an office of importance, with a duty to set an example to others and a role in ensuring staff on the parliamentary estate are treated fairly and with respect.
The allegations are believable for several reasons: first, the people speaking out about their experiences are thoroughly decent and reliable people. Second, it is not just one member of staff but several. And finally, anyone who has seen Mr Bercow in the chair in the Commons knows just how quickly he can blow his top, often in a disproportionate way to whatever has happened in the chamber. He has issued a blanket denial, but it is hard to believe people of the standing of Angus Sinclair and Kate Emms, who both used to work for him, would make this all up.
I knew both of these people when I was in the Commons and I tried hard to get Kate Emms to tell her story at the time. But the Speaker is a powerful figure in Parliament, and it is difficult for parliamentary staff members and even individual MPS to hold him to account. While he cannot stop you from speaking in the Chamber, he can severely limit an MP’S opportunities to speak on important occasions. Because of the hierarchical way that the House itself is run under the Speaker, it would take a very brave staff member to willingly take on the system. The culture and processes of Parliament protect him.
Robert Rogers, the previous Clerk of the House, was widely admired for his authoritative work until he left the role rather suddenly. He is more than able to speak for himself and I hope he will, but I was aware of the rows and rages directed at him by the Speaker.
‘The Speaker is a powerful figure, and it is difficult for staff and even individual MPS to hold him to account’
In the circumstances, I believe he is duty bound to give his own account of the Speaker’s behaviour towards him. If, as many believe, he was hounded out of a job he loved dearly, now is the time to speak.
The default defence given by Mr Bercow and his supporters is that Conservative MPS want him out – and some certainly do. David Cameron and most of his cabinet didn’t care for him as it became clear at one point he was showing clear bias towards the Labour MPS who made him Speaker. It was widely expected under Gordon Brown that he would defect. Things became so fraught that I even ran an analysis of his interventions, and the proof he treated MPS in a partisan way was absolutely compelling.
But the case against Mr Bercow today is not partisan and not from MPS; it’s from his former staff and it is accusations of the most egregious personal bullying.
These allegations need to be properly and thoroughly investigated: Mr Bercow should be given a fair opportunity to defend his alleged behaviour. But as Speaker, he must be removed from any further involvement in House staffing matters.
The House itself needs to get a grip on a regime that allows those in powerful positions to get away with abuse and bullying. Proposals for a new system are under consideration, but they currently look weak, and more effort is needed to make staff feel secure at their place of work.
Speaker Bercow once told MPS that he would serve in office for no more than a total of nine years – well, that time is almost up. He would be wise to leave now, as the allegations and evidence are expanding. Soon, leaving may no longer be his decision.