Smack! He was given a delicious spanking

NOW that’s what a proper Speaker sounds like. No histrionics. No red-eyed ranting at the Members. The House listened without agitation. Above all there was an emphasis on moderation.

Such was the House of Lords yesterday afternoon when its Speaker, Lord Fowler (Norman, as was) responded to John Bercow’s Monday tantrum over Donald Trump. Sometime Tory Cabinet minister Fowler, not always a fan of the free Press, ahem, has been Lord Speaker only five months. Already he has greater composure and gravitas than Mr Bercow after eight years.

How deftly Lord Fowler put down his Commons counterpart. Making a statement to peers, he said he had been telephoned by Mr Bercow that morning. The little chap had grovelled – had been ‘genuinely sorry’. Lord Fowler spoke of the incident as Downton Abbey’s Lord Grantham might have reported the hand-wringing of an errant under-gardener. Speaking slowly enough to give us a flavour of his magnanimity, Lord Fowler said he had decided to accept young Bercow’s apology. This was heard in goolie-shrivelling silence.

‘My view,’ added the Lord Speaker, dressed in courtly weeds, ‘is that I would keep an open mind and consider any request for Mr Trump to address Parliament if and when it is made.’ An open mind? Good grief. What an archaic concept.

Although he had more than 30 years’ record of standing up for minority rights, he said he did ‘not intend to argue the case for or against Mr Trump’s visit. That is not my role as Speaker.’

Not. My. Role. Three words. Three smacks. John Bercow, who normally tries to patronise all and sundry, had been given a delicious spanking. What a pity he was not there in the Lords to hear it.

If Lord Fowler should find a severed baboon’s head down his bed in coming nights, it might not altogether be a sur- prise. Down at the other end of Westminster, the Commons felt oddly sated. Mr Bercow was in his over-sized Chair but he was a beast calmed, the Hulk restored to normality. There had been a rumour Points of Order would provide some fireworks – would Mr Bercow’s more fiery backbench critics have a go at him? – but they had stayed away. Instead we had an intervention from Sir Edward Leigh (Con, Gainsborough), long one of Bercow’s munchkins.

‘The only way we can work is to respect the authority of the Speaker,’ said Sir Edward. Something too blatantly helpful to Mr Bercow would not have been right, so Sir Edward made sure to say that he was personally in favour of Mr Trump (he is also an apologist for Russia, if that helps). And yet, he said, ‘at the end of the day we have to respect and support the office of Speaker’.

Mr Bercow nodded with ponderous chin during this boot-polishing. ‘I thang him,’ he said. Thang yew. Thang yew. A pruning of the chin. A suckering of the lips as he assembled further ripe words for so noble an occasion. ‘He is respected across the House. His respect for and loyalty to the institutions of the country is universally acknowledged. I thang him for that and I think others will, too.’ HE smiled, semi-tragically. A little bow. Indigestion all round. ‘Of course we respect the Speaker,’ said Peter Bone (Con, Wellingborough). Savour that ‘of course’. The only person to have a mild go was Sir Gerald Howarth (Con, Aldershot) who tiptoed round the matter but said ‘I do hope you will help us to ensure that we can have full confidence in your impartiality’.

Mr Bercow went into a long spiel in which he sought to justify wading into the Trump business. For all that dainty pavane we had had with Leigh, there was a slightly chastened tone in his speech and bearing. Behind the Speaker’s Chair lurked Chris Bryant (Lab, Rhondda) who is said to fancy succeeding Bercow. He followed every word, eyes darting side to side.