When are we supposed to be outraged?

When the UK Government suspended Parliament in order to set out the aims for the next session and deliver the Queen’s Speech, we were supposed to be outraged.

Media headlines were very clear and the supposedly impartial House of Commons Speaker, John Bercow, said it was a "constitutional outrage".

However, while we may see the timing as tactical, it is normal constitution procedure.

The current session of Parliament, at 340 days, is the longest in 400 years.

This new agenda is, in fact, very overdue, especially as we have a new Prime Minister and Cabinet.

We had more frequent Queen’s Speeches during the Second World War, a time of true crisis.

If we want to be outraged, we should look to MPs still taking a Christmas break last year when we were staring at the first Brexit deadline or the current summer holiday.

Mr Bercow was good enough to interrupt his six week summer holiday to be outraged at losing some days from the parliamentary calendar next month.

Meanwhile, of course, the MPs need to have their break for conferences.

Many of us have curtailed holidays or cancelled conferences for much less than sorting out Brexit.

However, the most surprising part of this current outrage is that in didn’t happen two weeks earlier.

At that point there were open discussions about having a caretaker Prime Minister.

Take a step back. These ideas are actually saying the duly elected Government should be overthrown and replaced with a leadership made up from parties that lost the last General Election, to carry out a policy that lost the referendum.

Think about it. That is genuinely outrageous, and yet it was calmingly reported by the media and discussed on political programmes...modern democracy.

Lloyd Whitworth

Goat Lodge Road, Great Totham