Who has the power ?

[#1]

Politics....  Never been much interested in them.... l just read the odd headline about things... even Brexit... it`s far to complicated for ME to understand all that is involved...  hence my not posting anything in the humungous thread of that title.

Over the past couple of years, or more... I keep hearing that a certain dude in the House of Commons, known as "the speaker"... has derailed some or other piece of legislation, by his actions, ... defying the "ruling party line", or the "opposition line" depending on what side of the fence he felt he was on.

As I understood it... ( from my school days ) .. "the speaker" is supposed to be "impartial", and not take sides , but  to maintain "decorum" in the debating chamber.... a bit like a referee in a footy match.

So, how come, this guy JOHN BERCOW weilds so much power over the Prime Minister, and can, by his sayso, derail whatever he wishes. ?

Isn`t he usurping his position for his own gain?   Wasn`t he accused of some misdemeanour a few months ago, and should he have resigned over that ?   seems like he leads a charmed existence...

[#2]

The general consensus among the media commentators is that he was quite in order to invoke what has been a parliamentary rule since the 17th century regarding the non-admissibility of voting again for a previously debated motion (the so called 'meaningful vote' on May's deal).

The problem I have with this is - why has he only blocked the third attempt at this vote, and not the second?

[#3]

Not a fan of bully Bercow, and to invoke a three hundred year old precedence examples or no when not that long ago he refused to use that option, smacks to me of biased and overt fifth columist opportunism. As for being an impartial referee, he most certainly is not... in my view.

Good discussion on the BBC Politics Live earlier with Jo Coburn on BBC2 about his ruling. 

[#4]

---

@198kHz wrote:

The problem I have with this is - why has he only blocked the third attempt at this vote, and not the second?

I believe the second vote on the deal was 'allowed' because extra stuff was added to the deal as a result of negotiations with the EU.

Don't ask me what that 'stuff' was as I'm losing the will to live regarding Brexit.

---

[#5]

Whatever your view on this the whole system is a nonsense.

It's about time the House of Commons realised what century we are living in and either updated or removed rules that might have been relevant at that time but are outdated in these times.

It's a bit like those supid rules that prevent MP's having the chance to discuss some important issues because some fool is allowed to keep talking for as long as possible so time runs out for others to present their bill

It's about time they woke up to the fact they have a responsibility for running the country in a professional manners rather than acting like spoilt children.

I suspect after the current farce many people will cease to bother voting as it has become meaningless.

[#6]

Indeed @gleneagles , along with the realisation that at the end of the day and as many have always suspected, our votes are pointless. As the old he saying goes, whoever you vote for the government always gets in. 

Like the choice between Democrat of Republican in the US, Left or Right, Labour or Conservative, under examination those fundamental policies are almost exactly the same.They might disagree on such things as gay rights, immigration, abortion and other social policies such as housing but defence, foreign affairs and the economy all follow as they must the same set line.

Maggie went to war over the Falklands, Blair took us into Iraq, Edward Heath signed us into Europe, Blair still thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread and both sides of that political divide regard our National Health Service as too important or valuable to be interfered with.

Are we heading for a constitutional crisis? Seems like it at the moment.    

PS. And now, in this age of global warming we have Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat councillors all backing a new deep coal mine in Cumbria despite protests!

[#7]

You're right that he is supposed to be impartial (although he is a Conservative MP, by tradition none of the other main parties stand against him at election time). But it's his job to see that the rules are followed, and (as you say) decorum is maintained. In this case, invoking a well known (apparently) rule that says that the government can't keep putting exactly the same point to parliament in an attempt to wear them down, or waste time, seems like someone doing his job.

[#8]

Like a parking warden you mean? 

[#9]

Now, that is just insulting...

...to Parking Wardens

[#10]

Just change name of it from 'meaningful vote' to 'MPs' vote' and it can be rerun.

[#11]

I think that probably comes under the heading, "substantially the same ..."

Moderator's note by Dick (Strat): Full quote of preceding post removed as per Forum rules.

[#12]

Well, there is a demonstration taking place at the moment that demands a people's vote, which they claim is quite different from a referendum.

[#13]

A plebiscite by any name...