BERCOW’S NORTH KOREA TEA PARTY

Speaker who snubbed Trump hosted communists He’s forced to apologise – but won’t back down

JOHN Bercow faced being stripped of key powers last night following his attack on Donald Trump. The Commons Speaker outraged ministers by effectively banning the new US President from making a joint address to Parliament because of his ‘racism and sexism’.

It also provoked an angry response from the Speaker of the Upper House, Lord Fowler. In a highly unusual move, the former Tory minister rebuked Mr Bercow for breaching ‘long-established procedure’.

He told peers he had received a personal apology for the failure to consult the Lords over what should have been a joint decision.

And he suggested that both he and Mr Bercow should be stripped of their ‘veto’ over which foreign dignitaries can address Parliament.

However Mr Bercow has insisted to MPs that he was ‘honestly and honourably seeking to discharge his responsibilities’ in his opposition to Mr Trump.

A YouGov poll last night suggested public disapproval of Mr Bercow’s actions, with 46 per cent saying he was wrong to attack the US President, compared with 39 per cent who said he was right.

Tory MP Nadhim Zahawi said Mr Bercow ‘ought to think about his position’ in the wake of his outburst. Mr Zahawi said the Speaker risked accusations of ‘hypocrisy’ after cosying up to other leaders with dire human rights records, such as Chinese president Xi Jinping, who was granted a joint address to Parliament in 2015.

Mr Bercow also hosted a reception for four senior figures from North Korea in 2011.

Fellow Tory Nadine Dorries said Mr Bercow’s position was ‘more and more in jeopardy’ after doing ‘something so rash and so steeped in prejudice he possibly damaged the UK-US relationship’.

Lord Lamont, a former Tory chancellor, said Mr Bercow had ‘made a terrible error’. Former culture secretary John Whittingdale said Mr Bercow’s speech was ‘damaging to the national interest’ and ‘playing to the gallery’.

Sir Gerald Howarth, another former Tory minister, said the attack on Mr Trump raised questions about Mr Bercow’s ‘impartiality’.

The Speaker’s intervention infuriated ministers because they see the invitation to Mr Trump and his wife Melania for a state visit as a key opportunity to cement a strong relationship with the leader of the UK’s most powerful ally.

Whitehall sources say Mr Trump had yet to show any interest in the idea of making a joint address to Parliament during the visit, meaning there was no need for Mr Bercow to comment on the issue.

One minister said: ‘He’s an atten- tion seeker and an utter hypocrite. He hosts the Chinese president and the Emir of Kuwait and then he stands up and says he’s not going to invite the democratically elected leader of our closest ally.

‘Also what happens when there’s a visit from the UAE or Bahrain or Saudi Arabia? Is he going to refuse to see them?’

Arrangements for visiting dignitaries to make a joint address to Parliament are usually made by a secretive committee behind closed doors.

If a foreign leader is interested in addressing Parliament then the request will be considered by a small panel comprising the Commons Speaker, Lords Speaker and the Lord Great Chamberlain, the Marquess of Cholmondeley, who is a royal official.

The trio will consider whether it is appropriate to honour the foreign leader with a joint address. They will then discuss where the event should take place.

A joint address in the grand surroundings of Westminster Hall is offered only to the biggest figures, such as Nelson Mandela.

More controversial figures will be offered the opportunity to speak in a smaller venue, such as the royal gallery. Lord Fowler revealed yesterday that decisions are normally made ‘ by consensus’ and ‘ after consultation’.

The arrangement means that any of the three individuals can veto a visit. Lord Fowler said the Commons speaker had ridden roughshod over the process.

He said Mr Bercow had told him he was ‘ genuinely sorry’ for his failure to consult. But he suggested the system should now be changed to prevent him vetoing other controversial leaders in future.

‘There will be other leaders coming to this country who may also be controversial,’ he said.

‘ The procedure as it stands means that either Mr Speaker or myself can effectively veto any proposal for a visiting leader to address parliament. I think it is for Parliament to consider whether there is a better way in which such decisions can be made.’

Lord Fowler said in the meantime Mr Bercow should ‘ return to the previous practice’ of consulting before announcing a decision.

In a break with convention, the Commons Speaker was applauded by some SNP and Labour MPs when he launched his attack on Mr Trump.

Mr Bercow, who normally rebukes MPs for applauding in the Commons chamber, yesterday said it had been easier to ‘let it pass’ on this occasion.

His intervention also ruffled feathers in the United States.

Republican congressman Joe Wilson described his ruling as ‘very disappointing’ and warned it would be seen as a ‘slap at the Republican Party’.

‘He should think about his position’