Talk:Father of the House

message: A full list of Fathers of the House is at http://www.leighrayment.com/commons/fathercommons.htm if someone want's to do the donkey work Mintguy (T) 17:37, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The original list is on the parliament site , which seems to suggest that the list before 1874 may just be educated guesswork. Sjorford 16:36, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: List source

message: I've raised a serious issue that is connected with the Australian section of this article, @ Talk:List of longest-serving members of the Australian House of Representatives#Revisited.  Grateful for any comments.  --  JackofOz (talk) 08:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Revisited

message: The New Zealand section needs updated - Helen Clark retired from politics and is now working for the UN  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leopold Obert (talk • contribs) 07:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: New Zealand section updated and full list added --Kaspa31 (talk) 06:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What are the sources, please, for the "full list"? I note that at the very least, William Steward is missing from the list, who preceded Arthur Guinness. See this obituary. Schwede66 18:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Zealand Parliament 

message: This section needs a reference when one becomes available. Stephen Knight (talk) 11:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: European Union

message: Since we mentioned Israel based on custom, why not the U.S. also, where the President Pro Tempore (fourth in line to the Presidency) is also traditionally the senior member, albeit of the majority party?Mzk1 (talk) 21:57, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about the U.S.? 

message: Is it possible to use a more politically neutral picture of Gerald Kaufman? Cymruisrael (talk) 13:02, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture of Gerald Kaufman 

message: How is it determined that Gerald Kaufman is Father of the House when he, Kenneth Clarke, Michael Meacher, and Dennis Skinner entered the House of Commons on the same day?  If Kaufman were to leave the House, which one of the others would be first in line to succeed? Akwdb (talk) 20:08, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The article explains this: "If two or more Members have the same length of current uninterrupted service, then whoever was sworn in earliest, as listed in Hansard, is named as Father of the House." Everyking (talk) 06:27, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tiebreakers 

message: Lord Romily was not Father from 1943 to 1983 as stated. I'm pretty sure he was Father in the later years of his career, but not that entire stretch as he had only entered the House in 1920 (for example William Montagu, 9th Duke of Manchester inherited in 1892, and then served from 1898 to 1947 exclipsing both Romily's entry to the House of Lords (1920) and his inheritance of his title (1905). I'm not meaning to suggest that Manchester was the Father for a few years, just stating a counter-example I have found. New Progressive (talk) 18:27, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe Lord Romilly succeeded the 7th Earl of Macclesfield in 1975 (Lord Macclesfield succeeded to his title in 1896 and became old enough to take his seat in 1909).--L.E./12.144.5.2 (talk) 02:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

text: Further,I believe that before Lord Macclesfield the 4th Baron Southampton and 9th Earl of Shaftesbury were in turn Father of the Lords,and after Lord Romilly's death the next Father was the 7th Marquess of Downshire.--L.E./12.144.5.2 (talk) 02:30, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Father of the House of Lords - Lord Romily

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Father of the House. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20090325142809/http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/m03.pdf to http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/m03.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 17:37, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm wondering how far back this list ought to go for the UK and what source it ought to use. At the moment, we calculate the Fathers, using the modern system, back to 1701 (which itself is a bit strange - 1707 would make more sense as a cut-off). However, most of these would never have been thought of as Fathers by their contemporaries, and in some cases someone else might have been considered Father; the list is therefore somewhat anachronistic.
* The Commons Library gives first usage in 1816, with an 1853 publication using it in reference to a putative 1760s "Father"
* Again from the Commons Library, it is clear that during the late 19th century, while there was a recognised "Father", the method of selection was not necessarily "longest unbroken service". It names, among others, Joseph Hume (1852) who was named Father but is not on our list.
* From the History of Parliament, there is a contemporary quote using it from in a 1788 obituary, which apparently is based on "earliest elected" or "oldest" rather than "longest unbroken service"; prior to that there are various others as far back as 1593 - 30 entries mention the phrase in total, seven of whom are MPs who died before 1800, but Noel is the only early one who has it clearly quoted from a contemporary source
My feeling is that we should probably adopt the Commons Library approach of giving the title only to people who were clearly recognised by their contemporaries as such - which rules out many of the people on this list. Thoughts? Andrew Gray (talk) 11:37, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anachronism? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Father of the House. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325142809/http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/m03.pdf to http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/m03.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:30, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Assuming the general election goes ahead in June 2107, I understand Ken Clarke is not standing for re-election, but Dennis Skinner is.  Ordinarily, Skinner would would become the Father of the House, but he has said that he will reject the title.  It is purely honorific, so I don't see there is any opportunity to "reject" it, as such, but he could refuse to accept its minor privileges or duties, such as chairing the election of a new speaker (if needed) and moving ceremonial motions.  In which case, who would do so? I think Peter Bottomley is next in the list of seniority, and then Geoffrey Robinson.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.198.171 (talk) 15:12, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: After the 2017 general election

message: I've removed the section. The HoL has no father of the house now nor has it ever. This is the official positon and has been stated. Garlicplanting (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If you visit the HoC own website they have briefing papers https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-information-office/m03.pdf and identify members https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/kenneth-clarke/366 so its not 'unofficial' even if its not called that in the standing orders of the house. The HoL website/journal on the other hand has no recognition of it at all. I have a dead link to the leader of the house of lords stating the same will try to find a live one. (though as wiki policy is that additions to an article have to be evidenced the burden is not on me to prove the Lords FotH is false.Garlicplanting (talk) 10:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The House of Lords does track the peer with "Longest Continuous Membership of the House". Whilst the title "Father of the House" is probably not used, and I am not aware of any duties that fall on the peer with the longest service (continuous or otherwise), there is citable evidence that the House of Lords cares enough to produce that table. New Progressive (talk) 11:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  No one has provided any official evidence of its existence. Your link is a statistical digest which lists a whole range of attributes of members (members over 30 years, aged under 50 or over 90 none of which make those official positions or terms either. Wiki can't invent a Foth on such a threadbare basis - the citation does not verify the claim made in the article. (If you want to have an article 'Longest serving member of the HoL' then thats an appropriate cite) Sadly my edit were reverted by Pat despite its having no supporting citation. Wiki policy is clear sections can be boldly removed where citations don't exist and can't be found.  (As an aside, there is no need in the house for a FotH. The Leader of the Lords,(Gov ministers) Speaker take the role as needed. Seniority (precedence) is determined by Act of parliament not Age or length of service. Garlicplanting (talk) 11:49, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

text: The fact that there are no duties assigned to the role does not make it unencylopedic. I would agree that it would be better placed in a different article, e.g. List of Peers with longest continuous membership of the House of Lords  (I suspect it was originally placed here due to its similarity to the House of Commons role) - but it definitely should be somewhere and not just deleted. New Progressive (talk) 12:02, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is no 'role'; that's the point at hand! Being the longest serving member makes you no more than that. Wiki can't invent a 'FotH' merely because in some other chambers they have such a title(formally or informally). Doubtless someone simply assumed there must be a position without troubling to establish that there was. The solution to the 'don't delete' is to copy the data into talk to preserve it for someone to create a new article if desired; not to keep it in the live article where is clearly false and misleading any reader - as at present Garlicplanting (talk) 12:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  House of Lords.