Well what do any of you make of it with its arcane procedures and all steeped in History? Democracy is a cracked cup, I know but holds enough brew to drink from. Watching live events for many years now has  been fascinating - That includes watching the Un, the US Senate and House of Rep also. I have also attended live sessions in the subcontinent - where walkouts and insult trading marred the day with a possibility of manhandling by a rent a mob outside - lively stuff but not really productive. I wonder what happens in France: They heat up quite quickly in ordinary conversation so theirs is probably interesting. The trouble with all the high jinks in government assemblies, is that people's lives are being changed.  Parliamentary committees  however, that I have seen have been calm and productive,

I'm actually amazed at how little I know I about how the House of Commons works. Love all the old procedure - giving way to Honourable Members; the meaning of a slight gesture of the hand and the shouting of "Division!" when the MPs all troop off to the lobby.

What a bunch though - do so wish BBC Parliament could have been around for the past 350 years! Are other Parliaments in Europe and the State as rowdy? Does the Senate (or should that be the House of Representatives - I don't understand the US system at all) have the equivalent of the Speaker?

Priscilla,

as I asked about "mister speaker", who seems, as I read, has the possibility to chose what amendements are debated. I found that that was quite a responsability and even a possibility to direct politics...

I sought now how it was in the Belgian parliament, as I thought that that was special for the British parliament, but to my surprise it is at my first sight just the same...
https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/showpage.cfm?section=/president&language=nl&html=/site/wwwroot/president/bevoegdhedenN.html

[*]hij oordeelt over de ontvankelijkheid van teksten;
[*]hij formuleert de vragen waarover gestemd wordt en organiseert de stemmingen
[*]he judges about the receptivity of the texts
[*]he formulates the questions on which there is voted and organises the votings
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamer_van_Volksvertegenwoordigers
But:
Doorgaans maakt de voorzitter deel uit van de meerderheid en wordt het ambt toegewezen in het kader van de regeringsonderhandelingen.
The "mister speaker" is chosen by the plenary parliament but "Mostly is the chairman chosen from the majority and is the chair appointed in the government negociation"s...

And thus is it expected from the "mister speaker" that he works for the good of those from whom he is chosen

Kind regards from Paul.

Anybody remember the storm in a teacup some years ago when Mr Speaker's wife posed in a sheet for a photoshoot?

I'm a bit old-fashioned and while I don't want to be a grinch or spoilsport I do think people in the public eye should be careful how they act and hold on to at least a modicum of decorum.

Priscilla wrote:

I wonder what happens in France: They heat up quite quickly in ordinary conversation so theirs is probably interesting.

Well yes, at least in Westminster MPs generally stay in their seats and don't physically threaten the other side. Here's the (in)famous occasion in 1998 when chaos broke out during a debate in the French National Assembly when right-wing members reacted angrily to comments made by the then Prime Minister, Lionel Jospin, and surged forward forcing ushers to throw a defensive ring around the PM:



And what, you might well ask, was the debate about? The 100 year old Dreyfus Case!  The Assembly was marking the centenary of the Emile Zola's famous 1898 article, "J'Accuse", which argued that Dreyfus, a Jewish military officer, was framed as a German spy by the French military, who were looking for a scapegoat to cover their own security failings. Jospin's inflammatory comments suggested that the current right-wing parties were the direct successors of the 19th century, corrupt and anti-semitic, military high-command.

"If we examine what the Right and Left stood for at that time of the [Dreyfus] affair, you can say for certain that the Left supported the abolition of slavery. The same cannot be said of the Right. It is well known that the Left supported Dreyfus, and that the Right was against him."

But to be fair to Westminster MPs, it is only really Prime Minister's Question Time that is so unruly: many debates I've seen have only been attended by perhaps a couple of dozen MPs and have been rather like watching paint dry.

Hezza* swung the speaker's mace in 1976 but it predated the televising of events in British Parliament so I can't include a clip and any articles on the subject have a link ending ... and I have found in the past that when I try to copy over such links they become truncated or default to the home page of the linked website.

* Michael Heseltine.

This was grabbing the mace rather than swinging it around but a YouTube clip which was uploaded about a month ago - a Labour MP grabbed the mace and was asked to leave the House of Commons for the rest of the day.  

Priscilla I like your expression "Democracy is a cracked cup" though I regret its veracity.

Temperance wrote:

the shouting of "Division!" when the MPs all troop off to the lobby.

One evening in the late 80s or early 90s I was enjoying a quiet after work drink with colleagues in the bar of the St James Court Hotel on Buckingham Gate. Suddenly there was a loud ringing of a bell behind the bar which startled me as I thought it was a fire alarm. There was, however, no discernable alarm from either the staff or patrons, so I imagined that it must have been the last orders bell. This puzzled me, though, because there was at least another hour until last orders and, besides, hotel bars don’t usually ring last order bells. There’s normally a discreet last orders call made verbally to the effect that service would thenceforth be restricted to residents only. Noticing my puzzlement, my colleagues explained to me that it was the Division bell for Parliament.

I’m not sure if the Division bell is unique to Westminster but it’s certainly a remarkable feature. Not only does it ring within the Palace of Westminster but also in various pubs and hostelries within an 8-minute walking radius. I had been unaware of this facility until then. The hotel management seemed to take their constitutional duties seriously, because immediately after the bell had rung, the bar staff, waiters and receptionists etc calmly went around the bar, lobby, lounges and restaurants of the hotel calling out ‘Division Bell!’ in case any MPs might be present.

Originally the Division bell was a hand-rung bell operated by the House of Commons Principal Doorkeeper whose wooden seat is to be found at the side of the front doors of the Commons Chamber. In the 18th Century a mechanical string-pull device was established (similar to those used to summon staff in great houses) which enabled the bell to be heard throughout the Palace. In the 1850s an electric telegraph operated system was installed which allowed the bell to be sounded in nearby premises as well. Some MPs opposed this extension on the grounds that those MPs who couldn’t be bothered to attend a debate on a particular piece of legislation shouldn’t then be provided with this facility to vote upon it.

In the intervening years the Division bell has been periodically upgraded and is now electronic. I’m not sure if, in the age of smart phones, pads and laptops there is now a Division bell app although I’d imagine that there probably is.  



(A sign above the bar of The Albert pub on Victoria Street informing patrons of the existence of the bell.)

Outside of the Palace of Westminster the Division Bell is communicated via a regular telephone landline and so any establishment that is prepared to pay for a dedicated telephone connection can be linked to the official Division Bell. Accordingly, in addition to nearby pubs, bars and hotels, the Division Bell can be extended to the private offices/apartments of MPs, should they so want it. I seem to remember that in their parliamentary heyday both Michael Portillo and Michael Heseltine had their own private Division Bells in their Westminster residences, and moreover they said at the time that their ability to get to vote on certain measures was crucially important in getting measures passed or not (although I've now completly forgotten the exact circumstances and significance). Portillo's and Heseltine's offices/residences were presumably located within eight minutes walk of the House of Commons - otherwise what was the point - but as a matter of interest does No.10 Downing Street have a connection to the Division Bell? No. 10 is certainly close to Parliament, however I doubt it is practically possible to get from there to the Lobby of the Commons Chamber within the eight minutes. And now I think on it, where does this eight minutes limit actually come from?