Talk:Speaker of the House of Commons (United Kingdom)

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

text: It is worth recalling that s/he is called 'speaker' because the office was first conceived in order to allow one MP to speak to the House of Lords or the king and his ministers as the accredited voice of the Commons' opinion as a whole, and not just voicing his/her own opinion. Reciprocally, the 'speaker' was granted by the Crown protection against recrimination for what s/he said, because it was to be understood that they were, by obligation of their office, representing without any personal bias the views of the whole house. (Hence, too, the traditional display of reluctance by the person newly elected to the office.) It followed that the person who was to speak for the house at the end of its deliberations should not argue his/her individual opinion in the course of debate. However, there should not be an assumption that 'parliament' is only what happens within the chamber. The scope and work of parliament and of individual members encompass a whole range of activities within the physical and conceptual 'houses of parliament', and the speaker is able, and expected, to play an active part in the work where appropriate, albeit with careful discretion that nothing should compromise his ultimate role to represent the decision of the whole House of Commons. December 2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Medievalduck (talk • contribs) 17:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Quick Question

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Opposition 

message: 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)
Quite right. There was a Great Council called for 24 October 1496, and the king named Bray as Speaker or President of it (Wedgwood). The confusion has arisen from there?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Medievalduck (talk • contribs) 07:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Reginald Bray]]

message: "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)
thread_title:  Short speech: not less than eight minutes? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Non-commercial use image 

message: *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)
thread_title:  Add also? 

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

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

message: Am I missing something really obvious? This is a former featured article but even back then had no references. Now it is marked as lacking sources. Have wiki's policies on featured articles changed? Of course, general knowledge does not need to be referenced, but this hardly applied to much of this article.
David WC2 (talk) 17:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former featured article but no references? 

message: Has a speaker ever made a casting vote contrary to Speaker Denison's Rules? BillMasen (talk) 21:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  casting vote 

message: I suppose it's time for a rewrite. I suppose you could put a (resigned), (transition) or (awaiting new appointment) or something next to the status of the current speaker. Gamerunknown (talk) 21:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent updates 

message: This article currently displays the green portcullis of the House of Commons, implying that this is also used by the Speaker.
However, the Speaker's crest consists of the portcullis with the Mace of the Commons underneath it. Hence, perhaps the image on this page should be changed?
References:
* "The Portcullis" (House of Commons Factsheet G9), Jan 2009, p4
* http://www.mplevene.co.uk/staticpage.aspx?spageid=101480
* http://www.whiskywhiskywhisky.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&p=11228
Gadget1700 (talk) 18:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portcullis and Mace as Speaker's crest 

message: Viewing today's Commons business here, it seems that John Bercow has decided to end most of the formal aspects of the uniform. --Hapsala (talk) 13:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further simplification of uniform 

message: I looked into this and Bercow's vote of 47% is the lowest for a Speaker for some time, it may well be the lowest ever.  Is this worth mentioning? PatGallacher (talk) 18:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that percentage accurate? Unless I missed something the new rules under which Bercow was elected state that 50% is needed to win (if that is wrong do we need to change the article?). Other than that I don't think it is overly relevant; the low vote could just be a symptom of the new electoral system. Do any reliable sources draw any significant conclusions from the size of the vote? Road Wizard (talk) 19:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I was referring to his vote at the recent general election, not the election for Speaker. PatGallacher (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that really relevant at a general article about the office of Speaker (as opposed to John Bercow)? -Rrius (talk) 18:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bercow's vote 

message: Why not including the 4th 5th and 6th paragraphs under a global title : "Functions of the speaker" ? I will wait for possible different points of view before acting as suggested. Crocy (talk) 11:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I boldly moved the 5th and 6th paragraphs together into a "Role" section. The non-partisanship section probably works better on its own as its a quality of the office and its holder so to speak, rather than an actual function. - Chrism would like to hear from you 13:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main lines or the article

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Speaker of the House of Commons (United Kingdom). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090327021123/http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/g06.pdf to http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/g06.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050830053825/http://www.parliament.uk:80/documents/upload/g06.pdf to http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/g06.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:14, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why does the box on the right hand side of this page list Thomas Hungerford as first holder of the office of Speaker, while the text in the section History states " The earliest year for which a presiding officer has been identified is 1258, when Peter de Montfort presided over the Parliament held in Oxford." Thomas Hungerford doesn't seem to have been in post till 1377.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.25.109.140 (talk) 20:27, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: First Holder?

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:07, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Is there any Wikipedia policy on this (apart from the need for consistency in any given article)? The article says this:
:""
but also this:
:""
Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:33, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: p.s. both of these claims seem to be unsourced, so I have added the appropriate tags. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:08, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Catholic]] vs [[Roman Catholic]]? 

message: People jumped the gun a bit with declaring the office "vacant", as confirmed by the Clerks, so I did a bit of research on when he stops officially being Speaker. Standing Order 1 implies that he stops being Speaker when he stops being MP or a new Speaker is selected. I expect at some point on Monday the Treasury will announce that he has been appointed to by either the Steward of the Manor of Northstead or Three Hundreds - at that point he will cease to be MP and Speaker. (He could also it seems according to standing order 1(2) precede over the election of the next speaker, and will stop being speaker when the new speaker is confirmed - but he hasn't given any indication that he will do that and speakership elections have always been preceded by the Father of the House in modern times.) Jedi Master Bra'tac (talk) 09:55, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ..."presided", rather than "preceded".   Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:13, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  When he stops being speaker 

message: "However, this procedure broke down at the election of a new Speaker in 1971 (see below)"
When you click see below, you read about the 1971 Speaker election, however it has zero mention of the debate and why the silent clerk failed and had to be replaced with a member. 
Slywriter (talk) 03:13, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election section 

message: The MP salary is outdated and in need of update to £84,144 IsaacTW3001 (talk) 14:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Including MP salary"