Out of order

Bercow breaks Speaker’s rules

THE FURORE surrounding the Speaker needs to be placed in context. Despite his evident self-importance, John Bercow has empowered backbenchers and, much to the irritation of obfuscating Ministers, has allowed them to ask urgent questions on the prescient issues of the day. He’s also become a global ambassador for Parliament and the democratic process, even though some of his expense claims have been eyewatering in the extreme.

It was on one of these goodwill visits to Reading University where it now emerges that Mr Bercow expressed personal views on the EU referendum just days before he used the Speaker’s chair to accuse Donald Trump of being sexist and racist and to say that he was personally opposed to the US President addressing both Houses of Parliament during this summer’s state visit.

While many agree with Mr Bercow’s candour, each new revelation diminishes the authority of his own office, and becomes an unnecessary distraction, when there are issues like Brexit, the economy and the NHS to debate. As Parliament’s own website states: “The Speaker is the chief officer and highest authority of the House of Commons and must remain politically impartial at all times.”

The fact that guests on yesterday’s political programmes were all asked for their views on Mr Bercow, and that he only received a less than fulsome endorsement from Commons leader David Lidington, suggests the Speaker is at risk of losing the confidence of sufficient Tory MPs to make his position untenable. Given Yorkshire’s very own Betty Boothroyd never found herself in such a predicament, perhaps some humility, and a vow of silence, are the order of the day. After all, the Speaker is supposed to be above politics.