Talk:Speaker of the British House of Commons

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Speaker of the British House of Commons is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 30, 2005.

Article Milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 13, 2005	Featured article candidate	Promoted
Current Status: Featured article

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Socsci article has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale.

1 Quick Question
2 Division
3 Opposition
4 Reginald Bray
5 Voting/Representation (clarification)
6 Short speech: not less than eight minutes?
7 Non-commercial use image
8 Add also?
9 Animated image
10 No list of former holders of the office...why?

[edit] Quick Question

I heard somewhere (I believe it was one of those "did you know?" websites) that the Speaker of the House of Commons can't speak. Is that what's meant by his not being able to partake in debate? Impaciente 05:05, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

He (or she) most definately is allowed to speak, indeed he probably speaks more than any other member, however what he is allowed to say is limited to calling upon members to speak, calling for order, disciplining members etc etc. He can not voice his own opinions and participate in debate, so in that sense he "can not speak" but it is not a very accurate summation of his role, probably just used to make the fact more interesting MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 13:56, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you much. The whole thing seemed bizarre at first glance, and I was right. Impaciente 01:19, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Division

One considers dividing the page, creating one for the Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons, and another for the British House of Commons. Is there concurrence? Lord Emsworth 13:49, Nov 16, 2003 (UTC)

Done. Morwen 14:14, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

But there is a slight problem now. The article for the House of Commons of the United Kingdom is entitled "British House of Commons." Would it not be more consistent to title this page "Speaker of the British House of Commons"? If there is no objection, I shall move the page. Lord Emsworth 14:35, Nov 16, 2003 (UTC)

It is the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, for what that's worth. Mark Richards 19:53, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Opposition

Redcently added to the article:

Until recently there existed an unwritten convention that the two largest parties would take turns to have one of their members elected Speaker, irrespective of which party might enjoy a majority in the House at the time of the occurence of a vacany. It was under this rule that Betty Boothroyd, a member of the Labour Party, was elected Speaker in 1992, despite the fact that there was then a Conservative Party majority. However Labour MPs decided to disregard this convention, in 2000, when appointing Boothroyd's successor. Labour MPs used their majority to elect Michael Martin: another Labour Party member.'

I could be completely wrong but I had heard somewhere that Boothroyd was the first speaker from an opposition party for more than a century. If thats true than that would contradict the previous statement. Anybody know? Saul Taylor 11:13, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

There is an article on the BBC that says about Martin's election: "His election breaks convention as its saw Labour retain the speakership for a second time" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/986496.stm ). It doesnt say just what that convention is tho.

Also another article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/27/newsid_2502000/2502597.stm ) says about Boothroyd's election "It is the first time since World War II that a member of the opposition party has held the job". So a century is a bit long. Does anyone know anything _definitive_ about this? Iota (Mar 25)

That is distinctly wrong, in any event. She is the first speaker to be appointed by the opposition party. Many speakers have served during times when their party was in opposition. john 01:33, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

In any event I'm not sure about this bit:

At the time I recall some people asserting this but others, including Paddy Ashdown, pointing out that the Speakership hasn't rotated like that in the past. And in 1992 the Conservative Bernard Weartherill was expected to be succeeded by another Conservative, Peter Brooke, indicating that this "convention" hasn't actually been around very long. Timrollpickering 15:40, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

If you look at the years you'll see that since 1965, it has, in fact, rotated. But this seems to be because alternating parties were in power when it came time to elect a new speaker. The Conservatives then made the idea of alternating quasi-legitimate by appointing Boothroyd. I agree the paragraph should probably be removed. john 16:31, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

Hmm - According to Boothroyd's memoirs, the Conservative frontbench actually wanted to elect another Conservative, but due to a strong campaign and even because some new MPs did not know how the House works (this was the first vote after the election), Boothroyd came through - but it certainly wasn't a plan at all. Timrollpickering 17:10, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

I have edited the sentence that now ends "breaking a pattern of alternation between Labour and Conservative members which some claim had been established as a constitutional convention." It previously said that this practice dated back to the second world war. This is untru. The first Labour Speaker was elected in 1965 according to the "List of Speakers of the British House of Commons" page. Akashpaun1 November 2006

[edit] Reginald Bray

This article lists Reginald Bray as Speaker of the House of Commons in 1496, yet List of Parliaments of England shows no parliament nor speaker in that year. Which is correct? —Stormie 08:06, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

Bray does not appear to have been Speaker. So I have removed him. Mintguy (T)

[edit] Voting/Representation (clarification)

I've had a naive question about the UK speaker for a long time: given that the speaker does not 'speak' for himself, or vote (unless a tie demands it), is it not the case that his constituents are under-represented in the Commons? If my MP became speaker tomorrow I'd have no-one to speak for my constiuency. Are these problems irresolvible? Adambisset 21:49, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Well it could be mentioned in the article, the speaker can still read consituancy letters etc but they cannot raise matters in the house due to impartiality (that they could have raised if they were just an MP) Usually the nearest MP of their 'former' party to the speakers consituancy does that for them Alci12 18:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Short speech: not less than eight minutes?

"Furthermore, before debate begins, the Speaker may invoke the "Short Speech" rule, under which he or she may set a time limit of not less than eight minutes per speech."

Surely this should be "not more than eight minutes", or "less than eight minutes"? Or am I just muddled?

--Telsa 12:56, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

As I read it, it means that the limit must be at least eight minutes. The Speaker could, theoretically, set a limit of 30 minutes per speech.

-FunnyMan 05:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Non-commercial use image

Anyone else noticed that we have a "non-commercial use" image on the front page? If you follow the link from the big warning message on its image page, it basically says that Wikipedia does not like that license. Seems a bit two-faced to say that and post the image on the front page anyway.

-FunnyMan 05:09, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Add also?

Many people think of "the House" meaning the building; they do not know that a group of legislators are also called a "House".
As I remember reading it, the original purpose of the House of Commons was only to provide ways and means to obtain sufficient money from "the common people", with the monarch then still having absolute power. The House of Commons was then more or less in opposition to the monarch and his/her helpers; these were, at that time, the government and it was actually(?) dangerous at one time to be the Speaker of the House of Commons. Compare with the history of the Magna Carta, although apparently the dispute was with the barons, not with the House of Commons(?).

-QUITTNER142.150.49.166 19:28, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Animated image

Honestly, do we really need an image of Michael Martin with flashing yellow and red "order, order!" at the top of this article? Roger Danger Field seems to be in a minority of one at the moment. -- ALoan (Talk) 15:02, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I think it’s a definite plus for any House of Commons related article, as for reasons stated before. It gets across the job of the speaker very well. Roger Danger Field 15:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry - you will have to give me a better clue: stated before where? -- ALoan (Talk) 16:27, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No list of former holders of the office...why?

How come there's no list of former holders of the office? -- Jalabi99 03:17, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/p/e/Talk%7ESpeaker_of_the_British_House_of_Commons_208e.html"