New Kirkup article about Bercow's refusal to let MPs discuss Karen White

From the Daily Mail article (June 21st 2018) linked above:

"A Tory MP who blocked an investigation into claims John Bercow bullied staff did so after receiving a knighthood six months ago thanks to the Commons Speaker, it can be revealed today.

An official probe into the allegations against Mr Bercow was prevented from taking place last month after Sir Christopher Chope cast the deciding vote to stop it at a meeting of the Commons Committee on Standards.

Now the Daily Mail can reveal the former Tory minister made his decision after he was knighted in the 2018 New Year's Honours list, having been nominated by Mr Bercow.

It is not known whether Sir Christopher knows who put him forward for a knighthood.

The revelation comes days after the MP for Christchurch made headlines after single-handedly blocking government-backed plans to make 'upskirting' a criminal offence."

Missed this little revelation that it was Bercow who nominated Chope:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5867693/Tory-MP-blocked-probe-Bercow-nominated-knighthood-Speaker.html

Those postcards are great!

A number of women sent postcards to Bercow with Churchill quotes,
I thought this apposite:

'So we must beware of a tyranny of opinion which tries to make only one side of a question the one which may be heard. Everyone is in favour of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people’s idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage.'

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/3299190-Send-a-postcard-to-John-Bercow

We shouldn’t allow people to peddle anti-trans messages under the guise of trying to protect other people’s rights. We shouldn’t let people muddy the waters in that way. It’s just not people screaming abuse in the streets – it’s sometimes people who have access to the media and can write articulately, and are using their position to push messages which I think result in very considerable and dangerous displays of hostility to trans people. Up with that we must not put, as Churchill might have said.”

There is a clear conflict of interest here. He can't use his position to further his own biased agenda.

He seems quite chummy with Chope imo

When he became Speaker in June 2009, John Bercow promised MPs that he would serve“for no more than nine years in total”.

Summat's changed his perspective....

Kirkup "Why did John Bercow refuse to let MPs debate the state-sponsored abuse of women? I have no idea and his office told me they never give a reason for the rejection of a UQ. He is, of course, meant to be a wholly neutral figure who discharges his duties as Speaker even-handedly and without bias to any cause or campaign. I have no reason to think he did otherwise on this occasion. "

4th June 2018 (week the GRA consultation launched?) reception hosted by Pink NEws at The Speaker's House:
previous MN thread:
OP junebedford82 wrote:

"Just saw this on P*k News
www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/07/04/speaker-john-bercow-tells-pinknews-reception-2/

Bercow
"There’s still a huge challenge in terms of the trans community. We need to up our level of standing up for the rights of trans people. We shouldn’t allow people to peddle anti-trans messages under the guise of trying to protect other people’s rights. We shouldn’t let people muddy the waters in that way. It’s just not people screaming abuse in the streets – it’s sometimes people who have access to the media and can write articulately, and are using their position to push messages which I think result in very considerable and dangerous displays of hostility to trans people. Up with that we must not put, as Churchill might have said.”

What on earth is he doing? How can a supposedly-independent speaker intervene on something in the middle of the government consultation?"

Bercow's speech has been a frequent pop-up on PN articles throughout the Govt consultation period

^^The Speaker...got away with it.

Interesting article that because the Standards Committee said there was sufficient to investigate Bercow's behaviour but then it got voted down by 3-2 as too far in the past. Even more interestingly the idiot Chope who talked out the upskirting Bill was one of those who voted it down. What the heck is man who says he is on a moral crusade against private members' bills and faffs around solely for his own ego trip doing on the Standards Committee?

The Speaker is supposed to be Impartial and above all shenaningans.

However this one is certainly having a bit of trouble in the bagging area.

His previous Private Secretaries accused him of bullying. It went to the Commons Standards Committee. He got away with it.

I'd suggest copying them in on any correspondence. Paper trails and all that...

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/john-bercow-bullying-probe-blocked-mps-commons-speaker-a8355166.html

Not only is this completely unacceptable (Bercow's conduct, not Kirkup's excellent article), I would very much like to know who is pulling strings behind the scenes to make all of this happen. It's been obvious for some time that Bercow will always take the side of a sexual abuser over the victims, but is that true of all MPs, and if not who precisely are they being leaned on by? Because those people are actively impeding the course of democracy.

I am beyond furious now about this and have sent a supplementary question asking for the criteria by which Dawn Butler's question was considered sufficiently urgent in July, while this literal matter of life and death is not now.

Bercow went to my really crap secondary school...I used to be quite proud of that.

My MP is gender critical. Opposition.

What should I ask? To submit another urgent question? Something else?

Sorry for my ignorance I’m just not sure what exactly we are asking our MPs to do - try and get an inquiry maybe?

Another excellent article, thank you James Kirkup. I'm subscribing, it's only fair..

Thank you also @partystress, great letter.

Bercow's really letting his bias show of late. He's no Betty Boothroyd is he?

Dawn Butler got an UQ re LGBT back in July. Different agenda though.

www.parliament.uk/business/news/2018/july/urgent-question-on-the-governments-lgbt-action-plan/

I am truly, jaw-droppingly astonished that one man gets to decide what does and does not get discussed, with LITERALLY and officially, no accountability ("reasons are not given")

I believe ATH were also asked to "give evidence"

I've got to go now but I think Jess Bradley was representing ATH?

So the ATH written submission should be findable via buggering about with the link above.

It's worth trawling through the written evidence because there was some from GC women's groups but NONE were invited to give evidence in person (the serious bit).

Fantastic letter PartyStress and that kind of thing takes careful considered writing - being brushed off is beyond disgusting.

I know. I've been waiting for the right time. I think this is it. Going to try to get a meeting.

I believe ATH were also asked to "give evidence" - was Tara the Wolf a member? And does anyone have any choice quotes of theirs about releasing all trans prisoners, condemning the police, etc.?

Thank you Lang.

I think it's time to write my MP a letter. I've held off so far because he circulated some odious piece of woke propaganda round all party members (before I quit over this and anti-Semitism) so I reckoned he was a lost cause. But I think it's time to write nonetheless.

Fermats

Full thing here:

data.parliament.uk/WrittenEvidence/CommitteeEvidence.svc/EvidenceDocument/Women%20and%20Equalities/Transgender%20Equality/written/19532.html

The paragraph usually quoted is this one:

The converse is the ever-increasing tide of referrals of patients in prison serving long or indeterminate sentences for serious sexual offences. These vastly outnumber the number of prisoners incarcerated for more ordinary, non-sexual, offences. It has been rather naïvely suggested that nobody would seek to pretend transsexual status in prison if this were not actually the case. There are, to those of us who actually interview the prisoners, in fact very many reasons why people might pretend this. These vary from the opportunity to have trips out of prison through to a desire for a transfer to the female estate (to the same prison as a co-defendant) through to the idea that a parole board will perceive somebody who is female as being less dangerous through to a [false] belief that hormone treatment will actually render one less dangerous through to wanting a special or protected status within the prison system and even (in one very well evidenced case that a highly concerned Prison Governor brought particularly to my attention) a plethora of prison intelligence information suggesting that the driving force was a desire to make subsequent sexual offending very much easier, females being generally perceived as low risk in this regard. I am sure that the Governor concerned would be happy to talk about this.

Nobody can say that Maria Miller and the government were not warned. The British Association of Gender Identity Specialists were not invited to give evidence in person to the inquiry based on this. Jess Bradley was.

Have emailed my mp about this.
What angers me the most is this.
Who decided that a man could legally change their sex to female? I bet it was a man.With no thought of how that would affect women & children.
Here we have a situation where John Bercow is not allowing the decision to house a rapist & peado in a womens & childrens prison...to be discussed in parliament...it is despicable. He should be ashamed.

Has anyone bookmarked the submissions by the prison psychologist's association to Maria Miller's enquiry, and the statement by the prison governors' association?

My MP is super-woke: I would like to be able to say to him "look, people in positions of authority were told beforehand quite explicitly that situations like Karen White's sexual assaults on female inmates would take place, their concerns were brushed off as unfounded, and guess what, they were right all along."

Thank you once again James Kirkup. I am seething at Bercow's conduct.

And great letter partystress

Incisive writing from James, again. Thank you.

This opens the issue, in a very clear way.

But if there's no public outcry at this appalling situation of the actions of the Government and the Prison Service locking up vunerable women in a way that results in their rape then it won't matter/ they'll get away with it/ it'll happen again.
The Speakers refusal to allow any discussion of this is part of how it gets swept under the carpet.
Why is every MP not clamouring to demand of the Government what went wrong?

Do one thing this weekend- ask your own MP to get this discussed in Parliament.
www.parliament.uk/get-involved/contact-your-mp/

There are imprisoned women in our country talking about this tonight- and they're not just angry: they are also very afraid.
Speak up for them.