With the announcement by John Bercow, Speaker of the House of Commons, that he is to resign no later than 31st October 2019, a number of questions are then raised.
- Why should the Speaker of the House be an MP;
- Why should he have a ‘residence’ (Speakers House);
- Why should the Speaker not be liable to ‘recall’, as are now Members of Parliament;
- Why cannot the Clerk to the Commons not perform such duties? He/She is, after all, the principal constitutional adviser to the House, and adviser on all its procedure and business, including Parliamentary privilege; coupled with the fact that he/she is required to be, politically, entirely impartial – and is not a civil servant.
When considering the above points it should be remembered that:
- Anyone in receipt of remuneration from the public purse should be answerable to those that fund his/her remuneration; ie, the people;
- Should those that form what amounts to a ‘select club’ elect he/she that will ‘rule’ on their proceedings when their vote for a speaker may well be influenced by political party considerations to the detriment of those that fund them ;
This article is deliberately short to prompt debate, so the comments section are yours, dear reader.
Footnote: These are the type of questions that one would expect the Director of The Harrogate Agenda (THA), @NiallWarry – coupled with @RAENorth – both of whom have ‘sidelined’ this movement, to ‘jump on’, but when said people are, it appears, ‘brain dead’ and/or have hidden agendas, perhaps that is expecting too much?
Regarding this footnote, might we expect a rebuttal and reasons for condemnation; especially as both have ignore previous criticism on the matter of the stagnation of ‘matters THA’?