Mrs Bercow has Become a Problem
Why has anyone heard of an irrelevant Labour Party council candidate? Would there be this much interest in following her slightly off the wall diatribes against the Conservative Party? Would anyone care that she hates the Tory party she was once a member of? Probably not. Would anyone have heard of Sally Bercow if she wasn’t married to one of the most important, and neutral men in Westminster? No.
The mysterious Mrs Bercow has been spun as the soft influence on her husband’s former head-banging days, but questions still remain unanswered about this fabrication. How does this line wash when Sally was an active member of the Conservatives at Oxford? Also someone should ask her where she used to eat on a Monday night. She has been reborn as a Labour Party activist and is actively seeking a career in politics, TB doesn’t care what she says about the Conservatives it’s how she is saying it that is triggering alarm bells.
The public and parliament were rightly shocked and outraged by the appalling behaviour of Mary Martin who claimed thousands of pounds for taxis and flights on the taxpayer’s expense. Money she would not have had the access to were her husband not the Speaker. Mrs Martin abused her husband’s position for personal engrandisment, all be it financial. Mrs Bercow is just as guilty of abusing her husband’s position for her own personal gain – be it politically.
Sally Bercow is using her husband’s position to ingratiate herself with the upper echelons of the Labour Party. By becoming part of their attack unit online – welcomed by Kerry McCarthy, Harriet Harman, other MPs, and of course the delectable Ellie Gellard and other attack puppies, Sally Bercow is not only humiliating her husband with her crass obnoxious disrespect for Parliament, but she is also using his publically funded position to aid her own political career. So the money isn’t quite in Mary Martin leagues, but there is no doubt she is abusing her husband’s position for her own gain.
No one would care two cents about what Mrs Bercow wanted to say to lay into the Tories and the right-wing press were it not for her husband’s position. Lots of people use their spouse’s career to benefit their own, and frankly TB wouldn’t care what Sally Bercow did or said if it wasn’t the most significant neutral position in the country at jeopardy and if taxpayer’s money and the integrity of Parliament wasn’t at stake. No one would know who she was and give her political career media coverage, if it was not for her husband. She claims that all views expressed are her own etc and that she cannot be judged by the fact that her husband is (barely) a Tory, but the fact is she is piggy-backing on the back of her husband’s job to aid her own career up the Labour Party ladder – a completely unacceptable abuse of Parliament.
Bercow has is own spinner, and he should make sure that this abuse of his position is reigned in before it turns into a major embarrassment and headache for his already wobbly Speakership.TB doesn't care what Sally Bercow is saying, but how and why she is. He would also love to watch the left kick off if she was coming out with anti-Labour sentiments while married to a Tory.
UPDATE: Sally Bercow got in touch within minutes of this post going up - clearly more of a fan of tory blogs than she lets on. She refuted only what was already made clear was a minor point regarding the web, she claims she has her own mobile internet connection. Hard to prove either way, but the principle TB put forward, in the rest of the post still stands. TB suspected this would be the lightening rod that would distract from the rest of the post, hence the framing of it as minor. She made no attempt to deny she was abusing her husbands position to further her political career.
Posts
42 comments:
This is a very poor entry.
She's a labour candidate in the St James's ward of Westminster, come next May's council elections. Therefore she has every right to put her opinion forward! The fact that she is married to one the most important men in Parliament should not mean she cannot voice her opinion, since she is to be actively campaigning to win her seat, the use of the internet is vital in the modern day.
She is not the speaker, her husband is. She is free to speak her mind to the public.
"For those who have got in touch to ask why their comments/essays haven't appeared - well this is TB's blog and therefore while you are here you play by TB's rules... If you don't like it then get your own blog."
you wonder why people hate the right wing? authoritarianism is pathetic, the only way you're going to get full criticism of your answers is to allow pluralism to blossom. You talk about government being brought to account on their matters, the same should apply to you. Double standards or what mate?
P.S. I don't care if this doesn't get published, I just needed to tell you this.
Betty Boothroyd wouldn't have put up with this shit.
This blog is private property anonymous. I decide what goes on it.
The government is public property and should be scrutinised by anyone wishing to. very confused I think.
See the usual crowd are crying sexist pig again big bad bear.
Need a convenient way to evaluate any charge of sexism? Pull out the “If It Were A Man” defence.
Here’s what you do:
Isolate an instance of sexist behavior against a woman. Now, imagine a man is the target of the allegedly sexist scenario. Would the man be treated any differently?
If yes, it is sexist!
If no, it is not sexist!
If the Speaker was a woman and it was her husband doing this the same concerns would be fine. Pass.
Damn what a scoop! The woman posted a tweet from the WEB while she was using an internet connection paid by the TAXPAYER!
OMG!!! How will we ever survive!??
I notice you haven't said much about George Gideon Osborne's slight issues with taxpayer money either. Wonder why.
good to see you make no effort in defending any other point made beside one stressed as minor.
exemplory standards as ever Mr Hundal.
And yes this is the first proper post i've made in days. If Osborne had been criticised for anything other than an oversight I would have reported it, however when did this website ever say it was impartial?
I like the way you dinky two step around your allegation that Sally Bercow seeks to profit from the Speaker's position.
Just enough to cause a blip in your ratings perhaps.
Doubt your post deserves scorn at length, we may see.
This Bercow situation reminds me of last year's Labour List stupidity. It was obvious that Draper was a car crash waiting to happen and it only took a few months for that to be proven true.
The Bercows are also a car crash waiting to happen. So, sit back and relax because they'll end up sinking their own careers without outside help.
Did TRE (1st comment) even read the blogpost? From what he/she writes it seems not.
Sunny, you've got a lot more comments to come if you think what TB didn't write about merits a mention.
"Become a problem"? She always was as far as I can recall.
Surprised this story isn't on harrycole.net rather than torybear.com.
This is Speaker Bercow's "New" Politics - where transparency is all. He neglected to mention in his pitch for Speaker, though, that he was from the "Do as I say, not as I do" school of political integrity. It is fine for Mrs. Bercow to do all the partisan things listed: but in "New" politics Speaker Bercow should resign his post to allow her the freedom to do so. Then he wil be truly a-sexist.
A new Speaker should be elected for each new Parliament, with the "old" Speaker retiring to the Lords. Thus only older, experienced Members who are unliklely to be partisan are likely to even apply.
That could be relaxed for Mr Speaker Bercow, allowing him to return to the Commons and perhapd have another go at getting elected as Speaker in the next Parliament?
Tory Bear, You sound just a little bit obsessed sonny. I think you are just regretting that you have now missed the opportunity to 'send her a bottle of wine'. Don't be coy, we know you would 'do her' given half a chance..
Tory Bear, you claim that the internet connection is a minor point, yet in your blog post you do stress that it is the sum that is minor, yet the point is important.
Your exact words were A minor sum,but a important point.
Anyway, as for your wider point, I think it is disingenuous to put misuse of public funds on the same level as being a political opportunist. Sally Bercow's attention seeking doesn't do harm either to the tax-payer, nor does it do harm to the office of speaker. The only people who seem to be concerned about it are those who have had the knives out for Mr Bercow since even before he became Speaker.
I think you might misunderstand the nature of Oxford politics. It is always an error to take student politics too seriously, and I suspect that holding Mrs Bercow to the views she held as a teenager (if indeed she held them - the Conservatives at Oxford have always had the best social events, and as we know, Sally is a bit of a 'party' animal) is a tad unfair.
I note you say He is still falling far short of the desired levels of expectation of the Speaker. I find it odd that the main two criticisms of Bercow that I hear are a) he has a wife who is prone to saying unhelpful things, and b) he doesn't wear a wig... It would be good if you, and others, could elucidate on this point. What is it that a good Speaker should doing to win your approval? What are 'the desired levels'?
She is a nonentity without the speaker connection, therefore needs to be reigned in big time IMO
As TB rightly points out, presumably you supporters would also be fine with this if she was campaigning for the Tories using a publicly funded palace, the elevated position of being the Speaker's wife and quite possibly a free publicly funded internet connection and computer? I very much doubt it. You would be on it like flies on shit. You would be screaming about abuse of position and Tory 'toffs' defrauding the tax payer.
What Mary Martin did was outrageous but you remained noticeably silent on that because her husband's position as chief Labour stooge suited the Labour party fine.
The bottom line is you are happy to see carefully balanced and nurtured Constitutional traditions subverted as long as it advances the interests of the Labour party, who as we all should know, have a divine right to power. The end simply justifies the means.
After 12 years of morally bankrupt political joyriding, they know no other form of behaviour.
Athiret, "What is it that a good Speaker should doing to win your approval?"
Mmm, let me think... insisting that ministers announce new policies in the House first, as he promised? Would you like any more examples?
TB's broader point that Mrs Bercow is using her husband's name for her own political advantage still stands. The likes of Harriet Harman wouldn't be giving her the time of day let alone inviting her to join their online attack unit, unless they knew her involvement would annoy the Tories. She is being naive to let herself be used in this way.
She's not just undermining the Parliament she seeks to join, she's undermining her husband and his chances of keeping his job. She's putting unnecessary strain on her family and putting her own prospects before those of her children. She's being selfish and stupid and she'll end up hurting herself the most. Joyrex is right; they are another Draper couple in the making.
Damn, Guido got there before me.
If there is such a thing as natural justice the socialist cinderella will one day put on her taxpayer funded glass slippers and turn into a pumpkin.
Lame. Rather than fretting about her broadband, tell us where she used to eat on a Monday night. If it turns out that she had the bad taste to eat at Gino's while at Oxford, then her career is toast.
I was wondering if she fancied going out for a drink one night...
Sally Bercow looks suspiciously like Emily No-Mates.
Has anyone seen them together?
The same argument that says that Sally Bercow can be a prominent and gobby member of the Labour Party but not affect hubby's exercise of the powers of the Chair says that James Naughtie can be a hardcore socialist and not have that colour his on-air treatment of Conservative politicians.
A problem to whom? As far as I can see she's mainly embarrassing to Labour and to Mr Bercow. I suppose there's an argument where she could bring the House into disrepute, but... she isn't in it. So long as that remains the case, she is not a problem for the nation or for the Conservative party.
What puzzles me about the Bercows is the apparent plasticity of their principles.
John Bercow says that he rejects the traditional uniform of the Speaker because he feels uncomfortable with it - presumably with the old fashioned, pompous elitism and grandeur of it. Yet Bercow is apparently supremely comfortable about living in the elitist grandeur of the Speaker's sublimely palatial, traditional residence.
He also does not appear to be uncomfortable about making ample use of his taxpayer funded expenses for costly refurbishment of his luxurious, rent free palatial apartment either. Why did Bercow not reject this, socially divisive and elitist, aspect of the tradition? Why, also, did Bercow not reject part of his substantial salary? Are Bercow's cherry picked, palatial tastes consistent with his everymen and anti-elitist approach to the uniform?
Similarly, how can Sally Bercow proclaim herself a 'socialist' - as opposed to a mere Labour supporter - while living in such sublime grandeur at the working taxpayers expense? Why isn't such capitalistic and elitist concentration of luxury and wealth in her hands too much for a principled socialist, like Sally, to bear?
I may, of course, be unfairly criticising the Bercows, for all I know they make up in the palatial splendour of their grand, gratis home every morning and sing:
# We gotta get outta
this p(a)lace #
There is only one course of action here TB - Speaker Bercow must go, by whatever means possible.
He was always the wrong choice due to his wife's Socialist leanings, so his 'impatiality' was never a circle that could be acceptablty squared.
What is the record for the shortest term ever served by a Commons' Speaker - is there a minimum term that must be served before removal?...
WG
"She made no attempt to deny she was abusing her husbands position to further her political career."
Well, how on earth is she supposed to rebut your allegations, when you have not given a single concrete example of her abusing her husband's position at all? I'm sure that, if you explain exactly why you think SB is exploiting the Speakership for political gain, with examples in which her conduct was beyond the pale, she will respond. But, of course, you have made no attempt to do so in this post. Which rather leads one to suspect that your case consists entirely of innuendo and invective, and is devoid of anything by way of corroborating evidence.
It is true, of course, that nobody would care what SB thought, or report on it, if she were not the Speaker's wife. Yet, it hardly follows that she has exploited the Speaker's role, let alone that she has done so wrongfully. Nobody could reach that conclusion unless they were hellbent on writing the sort of fact-free hit-job in which you appear to excel.
Moreover, although you appear outwardly aghast at the suggestion that there are sexist undercurrents in this post, it is difficult to avoid that conclusion when the entirety of your case against SB consists of the claim that, in virtue of her husband's role, she ought to keep her mouth shut. Again, unless you can point to examples in which she has misused her husband's position to her own ends, you will rightly be called out for sexism. It is not enough to argue that she has sought to cultivate a media profile in her own right (or become a media whore, as you so charmingly put it). This deeply unprincipled bullshit represents the very worst of ToryBear.
Soho Politico
"in virtue of her husband's role, she ought to keep her mouth shut"
Er... Yes. It has nothing to do with sexism. Dennis Thatcher managed it, Cherie Blair did not.
Nigel Farage might sort this issue.
Have you logged the IP address that she uses?
Indeed. The solution to the problem of the Bercows is for the Conservative Party not to put up an official candidate in the Buckingham constituency. Local party members might be encouraged to canvass in neighbouring constituencies, if they wish to participate actively in the General Election.
This would give a clear run for Nigel Farage. It is about time that UKIP had a seat in the House of Commons, and any Conservative voter in Buckingham would do the Tories no harm at all by voting for him.
A proper Speaker could then be elected by the new House.
I object to you calling this fine woman 'media-whoring'. This is a distastful use of language. Why single out the media for your attentions. Mrs Bercow has been known to whore many others, not just the media.
Moreover her detailed descriptions of late night travels on the London Underground have probably done more to encourage public transport than any other Labour member or government initiative.
I have to ask Boris Johnson - when was the last time you created the headline 'BJ On The Underground'.
I must admit to being rather bemused that the spouse of a Speaker is allowed to behave in this way.
Clearly Sally & some others on here have yet to learn about Caesars wife As the speakers wife she should now be above politics of any colour
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Lucy
Her twitter account, I believe is really wrong for the following reasons:
1. She is the wife of the Speaker - to my mind she should not be entering the political arena at all.
2. If she does then she should keep the unfunny and stupid comments about the tories out of it.
3. As the sife of the Speaker she should show some decorum.
4. Is her account of what the Speaker is up to in his spare time not a security nightmare?
5. Location as 'under Big Ben' is hardly fitting for a position such as this - it smacks of being juvenile.
I think it is time that spouses / partners of people such as teh Speaker - people high up at the BBC should be politically impartial.
Unfortunately, all this does is make me think that as soon as the Tories are elected they should bin her husband as the Speaker - mind you then he will just end up in the Lords which would presumably suit them also.
these Politicians have learnt nothing.
a) Why does she know her husband as Big Ben? Is it meant to be ironical, given that he's not called Ben and he's evidently not, well, you fill in the blanks.
b) Was she again making another attempt at irony by denying the charge that she uses her husband's position via the parliamentary internet service to advance her political career by saying she's got a mobile dongle?
I don't know why you're worried about her, TB. She never says anything worth listening as far as I can see. She's irrelevent.
It costs the taxcpayer no additional funds even if she DOES use her husbands internet connection so that's just silly.
I've got no time for either of the Bercows, particularly, but most politician's partners benefit from the political position of their spouse. I can't see it's a big deal.
Ignore her. It's easy to do.
The Bercow's epitomise the out of touch political bubble dwellers. They don't care who they represent or what they need to say to get there, as long as they get to swan about doing buggerall and command a huge salary for it.
Fine when paid for as part of a private business, hell if my gaffer would give me £100K, 12 - 1 with an hours lunch and 52 weeks holiday a year - fantastic. But when it's paid for by the sweat of our brow she can sod off.
She is progressing because she's a real MILF - just like the gorgeous Sarah Palin.
I'd vote for both of them, together!
I live in Asia, so fortunately am not exposed too frequently to this odious dwarf of a man.
What I will say though was I was staggered by his arrogance and basic lack of courtesy, even on his first day in office, in his interview with the journalist Bradby (Youtube it).
Second, photographs of him just make my skin crawl. What is wrong with him to do the repeated hideous gaping mouthed, wall-to-wall grin, photographs?
Does he have some kind of mental health problem?