Film, Media & TV0 min ago
Should The P M Break With Tradition In This Case?
68 Answers
Answers
Should The P M Break With Tradition In This Case? Definitely, the slimy little runt should get nothing. Wonder when Sir Nigel will get his Peerage that Boris Promised him for not opposing him ? As soon as possible I hope.
21:47 Sun 22nd Dec 2019
John Bercow was determined to ensure that the country was NOT run by the Prime Minister, NOR by the Government but by Parliament as a whole.
As such, he did an excellent job and (assuming for the moment that the Honours system actually has any merit to it anyway), he's infinitely more deserving of a peerage than the vast majority of people who're awarded them.
As such, he did an excellent job and (assuming for the moment that the Honours system actually has any merit to it anyway), he's infinitely more deserving of a peerage than the vast majority of people who're awarded them.
Indeed. I’ve just been watching his acceptance speech after being awarded a lifetime achieve award at the PSA annual awards (an event guaranteed to get some people on here apoplectic!)
Making the point that MPs should be feel enabled to speak their minds and not be “lickspittles” of the government - or indeed of the Shadow cabinet.
And he’s quite right.
Sir Lindsay is a fair and honourable man and I hope he’ll be listened to. It would be the height of petty vindictiveness were he not to be.
Making the point that MPs should be feel enabled to speak their minds and not be “lickspittles” of the government - or indeed of the Shadow cabinet.
And he’s quite right.
Sir Lindsay is a fair and honourable man and I hope he’ll be listened to. It would be the height of petty vindictiveness were he not to be.
But he also ensured, by his selection and rejection of amendments, that the Brexit legislation had as little chance as possible of being successful.
He was a partisan Speaker who made no secrets of his objection to the most important decision the electorate had taken. He played his part in the ridiculous charade that took place in Parliament over the last two or three years that brought it and this country into worldwide disrepute. Mr Bercow does not deserve the "custom & practice" of enoblement usually granted to former Speakers. He broke a number of customs and practices concerning Parliamentary procedures during his time in office in a deliberate attempt to make the Brexit legislation face a more difficult time. Even his own deputy, Eleanor Laing, suggested that he strayed from the law. Such a man has no place in the Lords.
He was a partisan Speaker who made no secrets of his objection to the most important decision the electorate had taken. He played his part in the ridiculous charade that took place in Parliament over the last two or three years that brought it and this country into worldwide disrepute. Mr Bercow does not deserve the "custom & practice" of enoblement usually granted to former Speakers. He broke a number of customs and practices concerning Parliamentary procedures during his time in office in a deliberate attempt to make the Brexit legislation face a more difficult time. Even his own deputy, Eleanor Laing, suggested that he strayed from the law. Such a man has no place in the Lords.
But you are partisan yourself NJ.
Which kind of reduces the force of your argument.
I don’t quite agree with Buenchico that Bercow wanted parliament to rule: he assisted parliament to take control of proceedings when the government was incapable of governing. Why was it incapable of governing? Because partly of the hung parliament and the divisions in its own ranks never mind the ranks of parliament.
Bercow was right in his speech to praise the last parliament: a lot of MPs did what they did and said what they said because of their honestly held beliefs. And moreover did do largely politely, despite the assumptions to the contrary.
Not just anti Brexiters either.
Don’t forget either that when the first Brexit I’ll was heavily defeated, both sides of the Brexit argument cheered.
While it is good not to have a hung parliament now, will we see the same speaking of minds, especially on the blue benches?
I’m not sure we will
Which kind of reduces the force of your argument.
I don’t quite agree with Buenchico that Bercow wanted parliament to rule: he assisted parliament to take control of proceedings when the government was incapable of governing. Why was it incapable of governing? Because partly of the hung parliament and the divisions in its own ranks never mind the ranks of parliament.
Bercow was right in his speech to praise the last parliament: a lot of MPs did what they did and said what they said because of their honestly held beliefs. And moreover did do largely politely, despite the assumptions to the contrary.
Not just anti Brexiters either.
Don’t forget either that when the first Brexit I’ll was heavily defeated, both sides of the Brexit argument cheered.
While it is good not to have a hung parliament now, will we see the same speaking of minds, especially on the blue benches?
I’m not sure we will
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.