PETER OBORNE: The bell tolls for Bercow after Big Ben fiasco

• e-mail

Nothing is more reassuringly British than the sound of the bell of Big Ben. The bongs are symbolic of our greatest values: reliability, a proud history and a sense of common purpose.

Like the monarchy or — more prosaically — the black London taxi, Big Ben is central to our national identity.

So it is no wonder that officials in Parliament tried to slip out unnoticed the highly-controversial announcement this week that the bell is to be silenced for four years while the Palace of Westminster undergoes major restoration work.

The news was greeted with widespread dismay. The Mail led calls for a rethink and, among numerous critics of the move, Prime Minister Theresa May called for the decision to be reversed.

Within days, it appeared that the crass decision was to be reviewed.

Meanwhile, most unconvincingly, some of the MPs who sit on the committee that took the decision complained that they hadn’t been aware that the bell would have to be silenced until 2021, or that this was based on reasons of ‘health and safety’.

Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow attends a Loyal Address service to mark the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II at Westminster Hall in London on March 20, 2012

Birds fly past the Elizabeth Tower, commonly known as Big Ben, on February 01, 2017

The Big Ben bell within the Elizabeth Tower at the Palace of Westminster, London

Thankfully, there has now been a rethink. Since the PM’s admirable intervention, it has been conceded there ought to be a compromise. 

A member of the committee that signed off the work has said builders should work through the night on Big Ben renovations so as to cut the time the bell is silenced for.

Alternatively, bell experts have said it is possible to mute the sound.

Good reason might now have prevailed, but this whole sorry story offers a deeply depressing insight into the incompetence — and the lack of common sense — of our ruling class.

Ultimately, the absolutely asinine decision can be traced back to one man: John Bercow, the Commons Speaker.

He is the chief officer and highest authority of the House of Commons. Also, he represents the Lower House to the Queen and chairs the House of Commons Commission, which is responsible for the maintenance of the Palace of Westminster.

This means that Mr Bercow controls most of the key decisions made in the Commons.

I regret to say that his handling of the Big Ben affair is typical of his approach to his duties — and particularly of his lack of understanding of the values of the British people.

By tradition, although an elected MP, Speakers must remain politically impartial at all times.

But Mr Bercow has been, at times, a nakedly partisan Speaker. He often takes sides. He seems to bear grudges (inviting his favourites to speak and being vindictive to those he dislikes). 

On a personal level, he loves being the centre of attention and preens himself in an unseemly manner.

Disturbingly, he’s used his substantial powers to build up a power-base to promote his own private agendas and interests.Most notoriously, he has boasted of backing Remain in the EU referendum. 

And despite having been originally elected as a Tory MP, he fell out with former Prime Minister David Cameron amid accusations of prejudice against the Conservative Government.

Since becoming Speaker, one of the most magnificent posts in British public life, Mr Bercow has shamelessly set about shaping Commons life in his own image.

For example, he chose as a new chief clerk for the Commons a woman with experience in the Australian parliament rather than a respected Westminster insider. He also allowed male MPs not to wear ties. 

What’s more, he has said he will renege on a promise to step down from the post by 2018 at the latest. This change of mind is not only dishonourable, but a tragedy for British politics.

For the fact is that with this country about to enter one of the most difficult periods in recent history as we prepare to leave the EU, the Commons needs a Speaker who commands universal respect. That is certainly something that Mr Bercow does not have.

In the coming months, MPs face a series of critical decisions about Britain’s future and it is vital that a potentially belligerent Commons is presided over by a man or woman with utmost integrity.

The situation is made much more delicate by the fact the Government has no overall majority. This means the Commons faces a series of knife-edge votes.

As a result, the Speaker will have to navigate a path with impartiality and common sense — as he has to make many tricky decisions.

For instance, there could easily be complicated matters of procedure to consider if there is a vote of no confidence in Mrs May’s Government, which could lead to its collapse and the need for a General Election.

These are problems that would test even the most respected and impartial Commons Speaker. 

Yet the fact is that we cannot trust so tarnished and biased a figure as Mr Bercow. 

To use a footballing analogy, having him as Speaker in the Brexit debates would be like having a referee who is a known supporter of one of the two teams — and incompetent, to boot.

That is why, to his deep discredit, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn cynically came to Mr Bercow’s rescue this week by supporting the decision to silence Big Ben.

Disgracefully, Corbyn is fully aware that by offering his backing to the beleaguered Mr Bercow, there is a good chance that he will be repaid in future months.

I am among many who suspect that Speaker Bercow, undaunted by the Big Ben fiasco, will exploit his Commons powers to try to block Brexit.

For this reason alone, the Conservatives must ring the changes and force Speaker Bercow to stand down as soon as the House of Commons reconvenes.

...........................................................................................................................................

 Expect a reinvigorated Theresa May to assert her authority with a Cabinet reshuffle this autumn. First for the chop ought to be the inept Leader of the House of Commons, Andrea Leadsom, a senior member of the Commons committee which pusillanimously agreed that Big Ben should be silenced for four years.

...................................................................................................................................... 

Even by the exceptionally low standards of some recent Foreign Secretaries, William Hague was a failure. His Radio 4 interview last week with political historian Lord (Peter) Hennessy demonstrated yet again his disastrous command of foreign affairs.

First, the former Tory leader expressed pride in the Cameron government’s calamitous intervention in Libya six years ago. 

Mr Hague justified the decision to topple Colonel Gaddafi on the grounds that the Libyan leader’s forces were about to commit a massacre in the east of the country — an assertion which has since been comprehensively disproved.

Worse still, Mr Hague said he regretted that MPs voted against British military intervention in Syria after the chemical weapons atrocity near the capital, Damascus, in 2013 — which was claimed to have been the work of the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. 

A hapless Mr Hague said that had Britain intervened, we would have shortened the country’s civil war.

Sadly, the truth is the opposite.

Had we bombed Syria, we would have given great assistance to Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (IS), the two dominant forces fighting the Assad regime, and increased the scale of human suffering beyond measure.

 ......................................................................................................................................... 

 Albert Einstein defined madness as doing the same thing twice and expecting a different result. 

This epithet came to mind when I read that President Trump is to dispatch more U.S. troops into Afghanistan so as to fight the resurgent Taliban. 

Inevitably, pressure is growing on Britain to follow suit. Our Government must resist all such entreaties. 

History tells us that military intervention in Afghanistan leads to bloodshed and disaster.