The Bercow Problem
As we head for the General Election, I’m learning a lot more about how things work in British politics. Not that I’m a dedicated student now, or was uninterested before, but there is far more readily available information at our fingertips these days. Something I hadn’t known was that the speaker of the House of Commons is traditionally unopposed and so effectively gets a free pass. Not this time though. Which is actually two problems.
The first is that as he is now going to have to fight for his seat, there is the chance that the current speaker John Bercow may not be re-elected. On the one hand, this is a good thing, and the fact that speaker’s haven’t had to fight for their seat in the past is outrageous. The other major parties effectively honouring an old agreement and not putting up candidates of their own. On the other hand, as we now have a large proportion of what goes on in the House of Commons televised, it’s been very clear that Mr. Bercow is a huge improvement on the previous speaker, and as someone capable of keeping the rabble in check, is quite an asset. If he fails in his bid for election, then the process of finding a new speaker has to be gone through, and as a new precedent will be set, this could become the norm at every general election.
Realistically, it seems highly unlikely that Bercow will lose his seat though, as the opposition are a rag-tag bunch that are more likely to take the few votes they do get from each other than from him. The first to announce he was going to stand was Nigel Farage, former leader of UKIP, and regular supplier of outlandish sound-bites to the news media. He also does a sideline in trying to destroy diplomatic relations with his colleagues in the European Parliament. The rest are a fairly average bunch of fringe party members and independents that know they’ll get their five minutes on TV if they stand in this particular constituency this time.
The fact that he is the speaker, and has a reasonably high profile should see Mr. Bercow through, but there are points that he’ll need to answer. Although he has impressed in his handling of the house, and his lack of tolerance of the mooing and wailing that goes on there, he wasn’t entirely untouched by the expenses scandal that prompted the removal of his predecessor in the role. Some in his constituency are angered at the fact that the major parties are not providing candidates too, and rightly so.
I think it would be a shame to lose someone well suited to the role they are in, and who is doing a good job. Right from the off it was clear that some of the frills and faff of the speaker’s job were not for this man, as he dispensed with the ridiculous gown and garter garb of those who’d gone before. No doubt the now ubiquitous suit will become the comedy outfit of future centuries, but wearing it now makes a very simple point that getting on with the job is more important than the ceremony.
Ideally, the role of speaker should be done by someone other than an elected MP. There must be many capable candidates for the job. TV and news presenters that cover politics, lawyers, police officers, arbitrators, military types, maybe even former MPs. Breaking the link would prevent using the speakers attempts to be re-elected as an easy way to get media exposure for those that oppose him, and more importantly returns the proper choices to the people of a constituency no longer caught up in this old habit. In this case, the people of Buckingham would have their full choice restored, though it could be anywhere else next time. If John Bercow did fail to get elected though, the speaker would then be from some other constituency anyway, and the whole problem just moves somewhere else. Additionally, the unfair advantage of the speaker of ‘having the ear of any minister’ would also be removed, though the people of Buckingham might want to bear that in mind for now.
Realistically, the whole system of Parliament needs a massive overhaul. Again, the fact that the Parliament channel now exists means that we get to see more of what goes on in our name. A lot of it is archaic nonsense and should be done away with. The ‘wash up’ is a travesty and should be replaced with a simple pause. Rushing through or killing various bills just because an election is coming up is a disgrace. A worst of both worlds combination of work wasted putting bills together, and then last minute decisions resulting in half baked bills that aren’t fit for purpose. Part of the ceremonial side of this process involved the repetition of a couple of French phrases in answer to whether bills were passed or not. I’ve got nothing against the French, but that’s at the polar opposite of the plainness that should be brought in. On a more regular basis, throughout a parliament the members of the two houses use the term ‘the other place’ to refer to the Commons and Lords, which is utterly ludicrous. I’d love to see the Plain English Society given a leading role in updating the whole language of parliament and government.
A ten year plan would be my ideal. Carried out independently of the political parties. The brief would be to produce a way of working that is more fitting for the age we live in, and as much as possible with methods in place to allow future changes to allow for changes in the way the world works over time. I heard one politician on the news talking of the greatness of this mother of all parliaments. If this parliament wants to remain one to be looked up to it needs to reinvent itself, or it will be left behind and laughed at. Nothing more than a quaint tourist attraction.
Though his is likely to be a minor role in this election, if Farage is in any way responsible for starting the wheel rolling on complete overhaul, then it could very well be the one positive thing he’ll do in his political career.
I don’t think I’ll hold my breath for either outcome, but there’s always hope.
