John Bercow has been speaking on the question of whether the general election votes should be counted that evening or held over until the next day.
"I am concerned as Speaker of the legitimacy and integrity of the parliament" and "It is a foolish cost saving, and a short sighted cost saving and it represents a decision at the local level that is foolish".
In respect of the first quotation, one could suggest it is a tad late for Bercow to be concerned about the legitimacy and integrity of parliament - in that parliament is 'sidelined' where the instigation of our laws is concerned, coupled with the on-going shenanigans over MP's expenses and what cannot be denied is a misuse of public funds. Heven help us if MPs are in need of an aid such as this, which presumaly they are or why else has public money been wasted on yet another pointless exercise?
Picking up on the latter part of the second quotation, what is foolish is Bercow pontificating about a decision that can be made at local level. If that is what local people are happy with, then what business is it of Bercow? Not that it is known whether local authorities have actually asked those that fund their employment - but that is another subject.
As for his comment that: "holding some of the count the next day could undermine confidence in the financial markets" is rubbish when considering financial markets have had to 'work' with the economic strategy of the present government, so what is another 12 or 18 hours? And, bearing in mind the indecision of the Conservatives on matters economic - who it is assumed will form the next government - does it really matter?
For someone who could well be out of a job on both counts in a few months - Speaker and MP - perhaps Bercow should 'zip it'?