A reform speaker
John Bercow struck a controversial figure in his time as Speaker. While Brexit interventions will be most remembered, it is far from the only influence he had on the nature of Parliament.
“If we were guided only by precedent, manifestly nothing in our procedures would ever change,” is a direct quote from Bercow, perhaps signifying his outlook on how he approached the established precedents of Parliament.
For critics, Bercow was overly political. He is accused of tearing up the Commons rulebook to further the cause of remainers. Decisions he took around emergency debates, Standing Order 24, allowing MPs to take control of the ballot paper, helped the remain cause.
That Bercow would divide opinion was probably inevitable given the unique circumstances in which he found himself as the Commons’ highest authority. The House was held by a minority government, governing through a confidence and supply agreement and attempting to deliver on a contentious policy based on the divisive result of a narrowly split referendum. Added to this was the fact that the Fixed-term Parliaments Act introduced by former Prime Minister David Cameron prevented the triggering of an election. That the person charged with overseeing the House of Commons in such circumstances proved controversial is not surprising.
However, to fully recognise the extent to which Bercow introduced reform, it is worth noting the setting in which he took up the role. In 2009, UK politics was in throws of the MPs expense scandal. Political discourse was contemptuous and ironically, much like recent Brexit debate, there was a clear absence of respect amongst MPs for each other within the house.
Most recognise that previous Speaker Michael Martin wasn’t up to the task of cleansing the authority and bringing that respect back to the Commons.
On his election to the post, becoming the youngest Speaker for more than 100 years, Bercow established himself as an authority who would protect the rights of the backbencher, ensuring that the executive could not force its will on the House. He described wanting the House of Commons to be more “open, welcoming and normal”. In doing so, one of his first acts was to break precedent and abandon the traditional court dress. Instead the Conservative MP from a working class background opted for a business suit and “simple and unfussy” gown, which he said was “right for the spirit of the times”.
Bercow elevated the role or Speaker to much wider public attention but also brought Parliament further in to the news agenda. His use of two powers: the ability to grant urgent debates and recall ministers to answer Urgent Questions (UQs), has significantly reasserted the power of parliament over government.
In 2009, during the financial crisis, Prime Minister Gordon Brown only made two statements to the House of Commons, instead opting to deliver information through press conferences and television interviews. Bercow used urgent questions to ensure government ministers are accountable in the house and available to answer questions. Where his predecessor hardly ever allowed UQs, Bercow often managed several a day. Martin granted no more than 14 per parliamentary session, Bercow granted 307 in the 2017-19 parliamentary session alone. However, his liking for granting UQs sometimes came at the annoyance of MPs given the unpredictable start time for the House’s main business.
A further empowerment of backbenchers was through allowing the backbench committee greater opportunity for individual MPs to introduce and debate legislation. For example in the Queen’s Speech of both 2013 and 2017, he allowed more than the normal two amendments to be debated. On both instances this had repercussions for the Government.
“If we were guided only by precedent, manifestly nothing in our procedures would ever change.”
John Bercow
Allowing the House to amend a business motion and vote on emergency debates, particularly around Brexit-related issues, was often done on Bercow’s interpretations of procedure, something that would gain him the “political” tag line.
Bercow allowed urgent debates to give MPs an opportunity to ‘take back control’ of the order paper in the House, leading MPs to pass the Benn Act that reshaped the course of Brexit.
In other instances, he gave extra time to debate a proposed referendum on membership of the EU in 2013 and in January 2019 he allowed an amendment to a business motion, a controversial interpretation, that limited Theresa May’s room for manoeuvre.
Bercow’s influence stretches further than amongst MPs. As well as presiding over the House of Commons business, the Speaker also has an oversight role of the House of Commons Commission and supports an outreach role with Parliaments education service.
In his oversight role he failed to tackle a “culture of bullying and harassment that cascaded from the top down”, a finding made by Dame Laura Cox published a report in October 2018.
His increase in the public attention to Parliament has also stretched to an increase in the number of schoolchildren visiting parliament and the creation of Parliament’s innovative education centre.
Buried amongst his reforms was the establishment of a nursery in what was previously the House of Commons pistol range. Bercow also allowed parents to enter the voting lobbies carrying small children and takes some credit for the decision to allow proxy voting for pregnant MPs and new mothers.
Just as Bercow set new precedents for Parliament, so too might new speaker Lesley Hoyle MP, or he may seek to reverse those set by Bercow. The Government’s large majority will make it easier to pass standing order changes, however, with MPs having enjoyed additional powers in the previous Parliament it will be difficult to limit opportunities for them to express their views and ensure they comply with government plans.
Bercow started reform but it will be up to the next Speaker to decide in which direction modernisation takes and to what extent limitations will be placed upon the backbenches.
