Stop Press ++ Bercow’s Begging Bowl ++ Stop Press
Before the General Election has even kicked off, Buckingham Candidate John Bercow stands accused this afternoon of misusing the Office of Speaker in order to further his electoral cause.
In an election contest that is becoming increasingly tight, Bercow has put together a group of supporters called The Friends of Speaker Bercow. Nothing wrong with that: but the approach they’re using is, to say the least, dubious.
Letters requesting monetary support have been sent out to wealthy potential patrons….with a hard sell follow-up by phone. I have seen and been given a copy of this letter.
“His people are doing very hard-sell telephone follow-ups to the letter,” one recipient told me, “and they’re stressing that the request comes with the knowledge and approval of the Speaker’s Office”.
This was confirmed by a senior local Tory Party member, who felt that asking for ‘political’ funds (while playing up the Speaker’s Office angle) represented double standards.
Another recipient has emailed a fellow-constituent as follows – names have been blanked out to protect the confidentiality of the sources involved:
The Slogg stresses that the validity of the letter and email we have obtained is open to scrutiny by any institution guaranteeing not to publish the names of those involved. Unlike many in the media, we protect sources rather than bullying them out of the closet.
The above (and other) recipients of the email clearly feel that the letter and the ‘invitation from the Speaker’s Office’ are not at all coincidental.
“It’s crudely obvious what he’s up to” said one, “and it doesn’t feel right somehow. He’s supposed to be Mr Clean and here he is trading on his position. His position is supposed to be neutral”.
Although the Independent candidates involved have been happy to go on the record, recipients of the Bercow sell aren’t. Being wealthy – and active in the local Tory Party – they fear repercussions. Tory grandees have threatened to come down hard on those showing disloyalty.
The figure of ‘£40,000’ being bandied about was confirmed when The Slog received the FOJB letter extracted below:
While many in Buckingham are relaxed about the appeal itself, most feel uncomfortable with its hard-sell style – but the fact that so much stress is being laid upon the ‘status’ of The Speaker’s Office is rightly causing concern. Under Parliamentary convention, it is improper to use the Speaker’s position for any political purpose.
“It’s not nice is it?” said another recipient, “why does he need money to be returned as Speaker? Mind you, it shows he’s worried by Farage – and so he should be”.
Meanwhile, Independent Eurosceptic Patrick Phillips has sent us this extract from a Tory grassroots email to him:
Dear Patrick,
Yes, I did know about the £40,000 begging letter. I wonder what would happen if someone contacted Richard Hartley-Parkinson, chief reporter of the of the Bucks Herald, and told him about the requests. Particularly as John has a grace and favour home refurnished at the tax payers expense and a £140,000 salary. It may be worth contacting Richard!!!
I will look forward to receiving your flyer. Have you seen John’s yet? It’s very interesting…
We have been told that we will be de-selected as councillors if we openly show support for anyone other than John.
This person too was unwilling to be named (not surprising given the closing sentence) but, as the text shows, quite happy to help Phillips. But the question must still be addressed: what right has the Tory hierarchy to threaten its own councillors in an election where there are no Tory candidates?
John Ward
-
February 23, 2010 at 19:18 -
Of course it might be that he’s got only two friends.
-
February 23, 2010 at 20:00 -
Go Farage.
-
February 23, 2010 at 20:50 -
Ouch. that’s gonna hurt
-
February 23, 2010 at 21:01 -
I do hope that none of taxpayers money is being used for this. No election has been called and yet these slimeballs are already getting to the starting line.
A further example of why there should be NO FUNDING of political parties – what was Brown and Co up to at the weekend if it wasn’t blatant electioneering – and who paid for that????
-
February 23, 2010 at 21:07 -
Old Holborn….
I’d love to think it hurt, but I’m beginning to believe that nobody gives ashit any more.
Plenty of hits on the posting at The Slog…zilch from the so-called ‘media’. They are, when all’s said and done, part of the problem.It’s probably because Bercow is only a B-list celeb….and hasn’t shagged half the electors of Buckingham.
xx
-
February 23, 2010 at 21:30 -
You’re beginning to believe….. people stopped giving a sh*t some time ago.
Look at Sky’s coverage of Cheryl Cole today. That should tell you all you need to know. -
February 23, 2010 at 22:35 -
Are the Speaker or his “friends” in possession of the Membership List of the Buckingham Conservative Association. If so, has it been used for this mail-shot. Then should the matter not be referred to the Information Commissioner as a (possible) breach of the Data Protection Act.
The commissioner should then demand a list of people to whom the mail shot was sent to and a membership list of Buckingham C.A. Such a comparison may be interesting
-
February 23, 2010 at 23:02 -
I thought Bercow was intending to root out all sleaze? Or is that after he uses sleaze to become re-elected?
-
February 23, 2010 at 23:44 -
Great Scoop John. I’m with Sandy on this. Surely using a membership list for this type of letter is abusing the constituency rules of the tories?
-
February 23, 2010 at 23:46 -
No doubt you will be following up with hot news on the campaign to have Betty Boothroyd re-elected in West Bromwich in 1997, and, while you’re at it, dig up some dirt on how Jack Weatherill retained his seat in 1987.
-
February 24, 2010 at 06:24 -
Who is to know whether, in an equal-opportunities marriage such as the Bercow’s, half the money won’t go to the election campaign of Mrs B ? What party does she represent, again ?
Alan Douglas
-
February 24, 2010 at 11:25 -
@ Bill Baker. I think you will find that both Speaker Boothroyd and Speaker Weatherill were unopposed by the major Parties. If a loony-tune had turned up to challenge either of them, then responsible Parties would have instructed their members to turn out for the Speaker. You will also find that both were chosen on merit by the agreement of the whole House, rather than imposed on the House by the dominant Party as an act of constitutional vandalism by a Labour Party who consider themselves as “post-democratic”.
-
February 24, 2010 at 11:26 -
Dear Anna. Like the site.
-
February 24, 2010 at 15:31 -
Guidos just picked it up
http://order-order.com/2010/02/24/bercows-buckingham-begging-boys/#comment-459892
-
February 24, 2010 at 16:38
-
-
February 24, 2010 at 17:25 -
Posted it on Guido’s last night, I was hoping he’d be a bit quicker off the mark but as you say Anna, better late than never
-
February 24, 2010 at 18:16 -
@ GOM: Speaker Weatherill was opposed by Lab and SDP in 1987.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croydon_North_East_(UK_Parliament_constituency)Similarly Speaker Lloyd was opposed by Lab and Lib in both elections in 1974.
-
February 24, 2010 at 18:23 -
I wish I lived in his consttuency so that I could vote against him. He is a nasty, pompous little prat, well named by Quentin Letts as Mr. Squeaker. He has neither respect or control of HOC. I really hope UKIP win this one and I am a Conservative voter.
-
March 8, 2010 at 18:52 -
Bercow bought Home Cottage in Adstock on 3/11/1998 for
-
March 8, 2010 at 22:59 -
According to this political blog. It would
Comments are closed.
{ 22 comments }