aggi wrote:You see this is the issue. You're so proud of predicting how influential Bercow was going to be (and ultimately he's not been that influential, I don't think we'd be in a different place with a different speaker) but what you were saying was nothing like what happened. You were banging on about Bercow forcing a second referendum and the like which clearly hasn't happened. You can bang that "Ringo was right" drum all you like but we all know that what you were saying then isn't what you claim to have said now.
I had the good grace to admit-
""Forced" was with hindsight, perhaps the wrong term to use.
Perhaps I should have said "be part of a well organised, extremely well financed establishment and disconnected political class operation to engineer the circumstances in which a 2nd referendum will be brought about"
Bercow is but a pawn. But when the chess game is over, all the pieces are returned to the same sinister box."
And you say he " hasn't been
that influential.
1. He drove a coach and horses through the centuries of parliamentary procedural precedent and protocol. By chosing to table Dominic Grieves amendment that assumed the outcome of a parliamentary vote before it even took place.
He did this while claiming he "would not be bound by precedent "
3. Hes repeatedly refused to publish the advice he was given by the clerks he apparently chose to ignore.
2. This pulled the rug from under the Governments timetable, reducing it from 30 days to 3.
3, He
crucially simultaneously chose not to table a pro brexit amendment that would have put a "sunset clause" in the Irish Backstop that could have got a majority.
4. He made an announcement that ambushed her Government, by not allowing the government to try to have another meaningful vote.
This time, the Commons Speaker claimed parliamentary precedent stretching back to 1604
5. He controversially simultaneously blocked an amendment, the "malthouse amendment" that was expected to get a majority.
The highly respected former Speaker , Betty Boothroyd, described Bercows behaviour as "disgraceful".
He's expected to be the 1st Speaker
not to recieve a peerage for his blatant bias.
He's currently facing a highly unusual vote of no confidence.
I successfully predicted all this would happen following the QC lead independent parliamentary inquiry into bullying in Westminster. It recommended a root and branch reform of the culture in parliament . Beginning with the Speaker himself.
I said his role would be " pivotal "
Women's rights groups were left bewildered when the likes of Emily Thornbury, Jessica Philips and Margaret Beckett came running to defend Bercow and in doing so through decades of campaigning and principles out the window as they put thwarting brexit before equality.
This how the New Statesman saw his role-
"If it is Labour MPs’ honest belief that they are actually so tactically inept that the only way they can guarantee not sabotaging their hopes of changing Britain’s trajectory over Brexit is to keep John Bercow in place:
Sky's John Craig recently described Bercows role as "pivotal"
Another political commentator said he'd become the unofficial Prime Minister!!!
If you genuinely don't think his role has been "that influential" rather than just saying you don't, simply cos it'd having to admit I've been proven right . Then you're just like mutton headed Marty in that you're flying in the face of what the vast majority of politicians, political commentators, the public and even fair minded posters on this message board agree.
Bercows role has been pivotal.
As I said previously, being proven right, and that being acknowledged on here , on numerous occasions has, by fair minded posters. Has given me a certain amount of satisfaction.
But not nearly as much as having the likes of Marty, and now you, huff and puff, distract, swerve, avoid and say anything apart from swallow their pride and simply say, "you were right Ringo"
More self flagellation for me to chuckle at!