Comments on: TBB submits a Freedom of Information Request on Speaker Bercow

By: grassroots

grassroots — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:02:18 +0000

Hey Sue. No spite meant actually. Sorry to see you think bad form. Just want to see openess. BTW love your comments on this site and Facebook links. Very valued

By: Sue Doughty

Sue Doughty — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 08:15:59 +0000

This looks a bit spiteful bad form – maybe do this next year

By: grassroots

grassroots — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:33:21 +0000

Hey Stephen. Thanks for your comments. Some great points. Happy to discuss. In reference to anonymous blogging. Yes many of us do it and certainly people have different reasons. Jack Knife wanted to break news and discuss police & crime issues backed with inside information and he felt happier doing this anonymously. Some do it to add mystique. I have absolutely no issues revealing my identity. It matters not…..and even will help when I break the anonymous tag as it provides more freedom to blog, especially providing Vlogs etc. So I can let you know I am currently redesigning the site and will maintain the TrueBlueBlood name but will identify who I am. Ultimately it will make little difference but I have nout to hide and more to gain. So hopefully that answers that element. And yes, ultimately £30 a week matters not a jot but what bothers me more is the principle. I have no issue with Bercow taking the full entitlement. It is his to take and approved by the House. But by refusing to reveal how much he is taking adds that element of ….why are you concealing it? If he is only drawing the lower amount—then all credit to him….nice move John. But we have a right to know. Hope you agree. Thanks again for your comments….hope to see a lot more of them.

By: Stephen Smith

Stephen Smith — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:04:06 +0000

Although there are lots of reasons why people blog anonymously and I’m not knocking you for it; it does seem to be wanting things both ways at once to make a freedom of information request anonymously. Can I assume you gave your real name ?

If what you say is true – and I’ve no reason to doubt it, then we’re looking at a possible difference of £2,652 between what Michael Martin received and what John Bercow might receive – or £51 per week – or assuming 40% tax, £30.60.

John Bercow strikes me as the kind of person who’s not short of a few bob, and I suspect he’d not risk possible embarrassment for 30 quid a week. So I’m not sure what’s going on with him refusing to reveal his salary.

It crosses my mind though that you’d look a bit silly if he was only drawing £64k but as you say : Let’s see what response a Freedom of Information Request gets.

By: Tory Leader

Tory Leader — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:13:29 +0000

Great stuff.

Bercow is very very slippery