Bercow quits

[CryingSheep]

You need to understand the principles of British Parliamentary representative democracy. Although I do acknowledge that is somewhat optimistic.

I would say, very, veryyyyy optimistic...

[malvolio]

Sure thing, Mal.

Not a rant, not irrelevant. But hey...

[Old Greg]

Not a rant, not irrelevant. But hey...

Don't you even read your own posts?

Much like Corbyn was elected as Leader buy [sic] a pile of uneducated students and a lot of people who paid £3 to join Labour so they could vote in a clown rather than Millipede senior.

Bercow is an egotistical fool, but the rot in Parliament predates him by some margin.

[d000hg]

Based purely on which people are happiest to see Bercow go, I'd suggest he was doing a good job!

[Old Greg]

Based purely on which people are happiest to see Bercow go, I'd suggest he was doing a good job!

I would say so too. But a controversial job. Sometimes in the fuzzy UK (and precursor English) constitution, precedent stops being followed and new precedent is set. Bercow has done this, shifting power from the executive to parliament, which overall is a good thing for democracy and accountability. It's a.small chapter in a story that goes back to the Magna Carta and incorporates the Civil War and the emergence of independent juries in he legal system.

[malvolio]

I would say so too. But a controversial job. Sometimes in the fuzzy UK (and precursor English) constitution, precedent stops being followed and new precedent is set. Bercow has done this, shifting power from the executive to parliament, which overall is a good thing for democracy and accountability. It's a.small chapter in a story that goes back to the Magna Carta and incorporates the Civil War and the emergence of independent juries in he legal system.

Although when it suits his particular purpose, he will go back to 1607 to find a precedent that allows his desired course of action.

The Speaker is supposed to be neutral. That's where Bercow has failed, no matter what his motivation. The recent Brexit debates have been calling around five times as many Remainers to speak as Brexiteers. You have to wonder why...

[Old Greg]

Although when it suits his particular purpose, he will go back to 1607 to find a precedent that allows his desired course of action.

The Speaker is supposed to be neutral. That's where Bercow has failed, no matter what his motivation. The recent Brexit debates have been calling around five times as many Remainers to speak as Brexiteers. You have to wonder why...

Is the speaker supposed to be neutral between parliament and the government?

[Mordac]

These pro No Deal MPs are bad in that respect, but you need to understand the principles of British Parliamentary representative democracy.

Oh I understand fully. Say whatever-it-takes to get into Parliament, and then suffer from collective amnesia when the smell of the green leather benches hits them.
Take the Iraq War votes as another example. This isn't a new phenomenon...

[Mordac]

Is the speaker supposed to be neutral between parliament and the government?

No, but he is supposed to be neutral within Parliament.

[Old Greg]

No, but he is supposed to be neutral within Parliament.

Between whom within parliament is he meant to be neutral? I'm interested to see where your train of 'thought' leads you.