Peter Hitchens Bercow’s greatest ‘crime’? He made our leaders tell the truth

BEWARE of attempts to smear and undermine the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow. They are dangerous and wrong. I dislike much about Mr Bercow, from his drippy politically correct opinions to his scorn for tradition. On the other hand, I know him to be intelligent, original and thoughtful.

Full disclosure: he once gave me a lift to a public meeting in his Buckingham constituency, during which we had a fascinating conversation. He did not call anyone ‘stupid’, or attempt any form of harassment or bullying.

But that’s not really the point. The point is that the Government is far too powerful, and the House of Commons is far too weak. And Mr Bercow has made the Commons a tougher place than it was. By using his fairly limited powers, he has repeatedly forced Ministers to come to the House to face urgent questions on topical matters.

This is doubly good. First, it brings Parliament back to the centre of national life, instead of being a snoozy, mostly empty room in which the Government plods through its business and hardly any topical matter ever gets in. Few who have not worked there realise just how little happens in the chamber, most of the time, and how totally the Government gets its way.

Second, it forces Ministers, who quickly become arrogant in office, to come and explain what is going on, immediately, while the issue is still hot and the public are still angry about it. They really don’t like it, and they also don’t like the way Mr Bercow lets question sessions carry on until the awkward squad have had a chance to bowl difficult balls at Ministers.

In the pre-Bercow age, it was easy for front-benchers to blather on, use up the minutes and so prevent these troublesome questions from ever being asked.

I have no knowledge of the various allegations against the Speaker, so can’t comment on them. But I thought it was a very grave mistake on the part of the Metropolitan Police last week to give substance to stories that Mr Bercow was being investigated by them.

The police, in London and elsewhere, are obviously obliged to pay attention to serious allegations against anyone. But oughtn’t they to stay quiet about them until they have something to report to the Crown Prosecution Service? People wrongly take their involvement as a sign of guilt. They seem far too willing to allow their authority and reputation to be used.

As for the claim that Mr Bercow was rude under his breath about Andrea Leadsom, the Leader of the House, I call as my witness that wise old Tory parliamentarian Ken Clarke, a man who has a good sense of humour and a good sense of proportion (much the same thing). He says: ‘If action were taken every time a Member of this House felt moved to say under his breath something rather abusive about another Member, the chamber would be deserted for considerable lengths of time.’

Of course this is true, and with all these allegations you have to ask yourself this simple question: If Mr Bercow was the fawning favourite of Downing Street, and didn’t make life harder for Ministers, would you be reading so many damaging stories about him, and so many prissy articles from in-the-know Government stooges, attacking him? Of course you wouldn’t.

It may well be that Mr Bercow has sat too long on his big greenleather throne. It may well be time for someone else to take over. But if he is attacked in this way, then he must stay and we must support him even if we don’t like him. It’s a matter of principle. Downing Street is quite powerful enough already. We are a free country because Speakers and MPs, from time to time, have been ready to challenge King or Premier.