Bercow draws curtains on theatre of absurd

His successor will have to rebuild trust in parliament: John Bercow after the motion for an early election was voted down on Tuesday. Picture: AFP

John Bercow’s announcement that he will quit as Speaker of the House of Commons on October 31, or at a general election if that comes sooner, brought a final moment­ of theatre to what has been the longest-running and most turbulent session of parliament in recent history.

Hours before, the government had confirmed that parliament would be prorogued at the close of business. MPs then voted once again to refuse the government’s demand for an immediate general election, thereby ensuring that the same parliament will return again on October 15 after what will have been the longest suspension in modern times before a Queen’s speech and the start of a new session­. Since that makes a genera­l election impossible until late November at the earliest, Mr Bercow has ensured that this parlia­ment will elect his successor.

That will only add to the frustrations of a government which has made no secret of its disdain and distrust of the Speaker.

Mr Bercow’s repeated decis­ions to bend parliamentary rules to allow MPs to take control of the Commons order paper and pass legislation designed to make it impossibl­e for the government to take Britain out of the EU without a deal, have prompted repeated accusations of bias.

Suspicions about the Speaker’s partiality were fuelled by an anti-Brexit sticker displayed in his car, which he said was put there by his wife. Such was the scale of the anger among Tories that Business Secretary Andrea Leadsom has announced that the party intended to break with convention by fielding a candidate against him at the next general election.

The Conservatives had come to see replacing Mr Bercow with a Speaker less likely to collude with Remainer MPs to frustrate Brexit as one benefit of an early election.

In reality it was long past time for Mr Bercow to go. It is true he did much to champion the interests of backbench MPs and to give them opportunities to hold the executive to account. By granting them the right to ask urgent questions of ministers at times of crisis, he helped at the start of his 10 years in the chair to restore the central role of parliament as the focus of political life.

Mr Bercow argued that his recen­t controversial rulings in relatio­n to Brexit were motivated by a similar desire to allow parliament’s voice to be heard on the definin­g issue facing the country.

Yet by allowing himself to become­ such a polarising and par­ti­sa­n figure, and adopting a patron­ising and irritating manner, he bears some responsibility for the alarming loss of trust in parliament during the present crisis­.

We may also live to regret his cavalier attitude towards preced­ent, which opens the way for others­ to flout parliamentary proced­ures. That so many on the Conservative benches refused to join in applause at the end of his statement on Tuesday only underline­d how he has alienated a large number of MPs by his rudeness and lack of impartiality.

It will now fall on members to choose a more disinterested successor, who can rebuild that trust.

It would be wrong, however, to lay too much of the blame for the low esteem in which parliament is held at his feet. When this session opened in May 2017, MPs had one overriding task: to deliver the legislation needed to ensure Britain­’s orderly exit from the EU.

Yet 810 days later it has failed. Parliament has voted three times against the withdrawal agreement negotiated by Theresa May, legislated to block a no-deal exit and twice voted to prevent the general election which the constitution demands should follow a deadlocked parliament.

It is an extraordinary record of failure by all branches of Britain’s political system. Parliament will not sit again until mid-October. When it returns, it is vital that all sides find a way to break the impasse­. More is at stake than just Britain’s relationship with the EU.

The Times