LOL Look at that piece of shit Miliband sitting there! I bet he's thinking to himself - "This Labour government is fucked, and I'm going to be the new leader mwahahahahahahaha". Fucking toff cunt.
@pcjoel999 The deputy speaker called a division, because the MPs weren't unanimous either way. The Tories who in principle were opposed to the 3rd runway shouted 'No', but when it came to the actual vote their whips told them not to actually vote 'No'. So McDonnell was suspended legitimately, and even though I support him clearly he needed to be disciplined somehow.
Nimby cunt...there are 60 >million< people in this country - fuck his nimby Home Counties twat constituents. The needs of the country outweighs their wishes for an idyllic Berks / Bucks existence. Fuck off further away from London if you want peace and quiet!
And where is Geoff Hoon today? Oh yes, banned from the House of Commons for five years for corruption - not for shouting on behalf of his constituents.
@redface626 Yes this is spot on there should be three in total. Removing the mace is like puncturing a football mid match, only do it when completely necessary!
@NoctisEreptor I think this was necessary. This is the type of thing that lead labour to lose power. Here they are not representing the people that voted for them but instead they are representing a small special interest much like the Iraq war.
@redface626 Yes but the point IS to discuss this issue, removing the mace is only acceptable when it turns to "fisticuffs". The very word parliament means French for talking of disscussion. If you remove the mace you're taking matters of the nation into your own hands YOU CAN'T DO THAT!
@NoctisEreptor: Also bear in mind that the Mace represents the Queen's authority that allows Parliament to debate laws. So if you remove it, it means parliament can no longer legislate.
So, what does 'naming' mean? Is that a motion to suspend a member? And 'Division, clear the lobby', does that mean the house will divide to take a vote?
@eamonnca1 Parliament is based on secret ballot, to stop politicians getting their heads on spikes or something red hot shoved somewhere private. Today it is merely convention, they call each other "my honourable friend" or whatever. If anyone is named they must leave, I didn't realise a vote was required. The secret ballot is extended to ordinary voters too, and most democratic systems worldwide are based on this.
@jacksawild Interesting. How about PMQs though? When calling out who's asking the next question, the speaker always addresses the MPs by name rather than by constituency, which I always thought was a bit odd. Is there something about PMQs that implies it's potentially not an MP asking the question? Or is it because Prime Minister's Questions is not a 'debate' as such and hence no voting taking place?
Members are called by name during debates and during any question time. Just a bit of tradition, the Speaker or Deputy Speaker's calling is never written in Hansard unless they say something alongside it.
@jacksawild Sorry to correct you but divisions are not secret ballots. The results of divisions of the House and how MPs voted are published in Hansard. The reason members are addressed in the third person is to avoid personal insults and the like.
@eamonnca1 To name the honourable member is to suspend the member, yes. 'Division, clear the lobbies' orders the Sergeant-at-Arms and his officials to clear the division lobbies where MPs go to cast their votes. There is the 'Aye' Lobby and the 'No' Lobby.
@eamonnca1 A MPs name is not normaly used in the house MPs are usualy refered to as the honerable member for ... . The speaker 'naming' the member means they have comitted unparliamentary behaviour and the Speaker calls for the other MPs to vote to suspend him/her from the house. As the speaker got no clear verbal result he calls for a division where the MPs make a formal vote passing into the 'aye' or 'no' lobbies. 'Clear the lobby' means anyone who's not an MP, visitors etc has to be removed
Who was the Tory politician in the 70's who grabbed the Mace and tried to lunge at the Labour government benches?? (the gov had passed a bill nationalizing the Air industry)
If you look in the long shot at the beginning you can see the gold mace on the table, and then pause the video one second before the end and you can see it on the front bench to the left
i've this many times in the house of commons that after each person speaks some other members stand up for a second or two and then sit down again. why is that?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You can't watch 5 minutes of British politics without somebody using the word "democracy" ...and yet the UK remains constitutionally a monarchy. Ultimately monarchy is not and cannot be democratic.
The Queen represents the unity of the nation. The monarch hasn't had much to do with the daily affairs of government since Charles Ist lost the English civil war in the 17th century.
But the Queen does still have the powers to take control whenever she wants however she choses not to use these powers by tradition and that it would rob us all of that weekly entertainment we call "Prime Minister's Questions"
@kanenkitten No not just from a few, and if anything parliament would son after dissolve the British Monarchy and turn this country into a republic like the United States.
@coneko: Well how would they dissolve the monarchy if parliament had already been dissolved? A bit like between now and the election the commons power now lies with the Queen and her Privy Council
@RWT683 Ultimately, you don't understand the evolution of our democracy. Britain operates a parliamentary democracy wielding the authority of the Monarch. Constitutionaly, the will of the Crown governs the land, but this will is at the direction of the House of Commons (through the Crown's chief advisor: the Prime Minister).
The British monarch has (in theory) almost limitless power to enact or veto laws, make appointments, conclude treaties, command the military, or jail people and free them at "HM's Pleasure." Just because these powers haven't been used recently doesn't mean they don't exist.
In practice the British PM, (which is not even a legal office, he's 1st Treasury Lord) & cabinet usurp these powers and by means of "gov't bills" and party discipline rule with absolutely no check on their power.
@RWT683These powers definitely exist with the Queen as the vessel via which they are exercised each day. The "orders" issued are at the direction of offices over which she has no practical control like the CPS.
The term "Prime Minister" merely refers to the one invited by the Queen to form a government
Initially you seemed to attack Britain for having a Monarch as the Head of State, saying it was incompatable with democracy. Now you are attacking Parliamentary Democracy itself. Please clarify
I'm saying having a monarch (or indeed a House of Lords) is pointless when the Commons have usurped all the power. But when the PM and his party can do whatever they want it's no better than an absolute monarchy.
I think the UK would do well to at least have a written constitution which sets out the powers of government and balances it between different organs.
Revolutions are necessary from time to time and the UK would seem long overdue.
I'm saying having a monarch (or indeed a House of Lords) is pointless when the Commons have usurped all the power. But when the PM and his party can do whatever they want it's no better than an absolute monarchy.
I think the UK would do well to at least have a written constitution which sets out the powers of government and balances it between different organs.
Revolutions are necessary from time to time and the UK would seem long overdue.
So absolute power by way of parliamentary tyranny is more "democratic" than a regal tyranny how? Because MPs are elected? There are elections in North Korea too -- but like the US and UK (and indeed most countries) the process is rigged.
The point being "democracy" means nothing and all the more so in a country operating a medieval form of government where centuries of corruption has been institutionalized to the point it is called "tradition."
No money to build the runway so i think Johnny won. Not being thick or anything but there are airports around England which are big small medium and all that i'm sure there are airports out there which can have more runways or extended runways without disturbing London way?
@vulnerabledonkey Where the speaker can't work out which side has won from a voice vote they call a full "Division", as here. then the MPs must vote in person by walking through the appropriate lobby, Yes to the right side of the chamber, No to the left. When it came to organising this in this case there were actually no MPs prepared to report the results for the No side and the 'Ayes' accordingly won by default.
@vulnerabledonkey He doesnt, he calls a division and tells them to clear the lobby which means they all now go vote on that motion, which is weather he should be suspended from the house.
It's based more on tradition as to who was more vociferous - clearly the passion was in the nos - but it generally seems to the speaker to have been a split between the measured yes's and the passionate nos. It only really works when there is a blatant majority
I cant believe he removed the Ceremonial Mace representing Her Majesty's Authority from its rightful place!!
As far as I am aware, the Mace has to be in its place before ANY parliamentary proceedings can take place, so it leaves me wondering why they tried to pass a motion without the Mace in its place...Or does it just have to be 'present' as by I mean in Chamber?
good excuse for an extended liquid lunch chaps. such a pack of warbling idiots, no wonder the country is run by special interest lobbies with corporate and foreign interests instead of the british people. id prefer a dictatorship to this quasi democracy. like gibson said "why swap one tyrant a thousand miles away for a thousand tyrants one mile away" atleast a dictator can be overthrown in a revolution, how do you get rid of all these inbred bastards?
Clearly, nrjelley, you do not know McDonnell. He's one of the few really dark red Labour MPs left, and stood against Brown for the leadership contest on a socialist platform.
Fail. Parliament of the United Kingdom, why do the English heckle? no sorry get it right United Kingdom: Scottish, English, Welsh and Northern Irish, really bit more intelligence needed
He didnt get chucked out of the house because he heckled but he actually came down the stairs and took the mace off its standing point and placed it on the benches. Thats why he was suspended. The mace gives authority to the House Of Commons in the name of Her Maj.
heckling is fun. You should see Prime Ministers Questions.
Manhandling the mace in the US Houses will get you suspended as well. I remember the Sjt-at-arms threatened to break up a quarrel between Rep Waters and Rep Obey. I wished that the Sjt WOULD have thunked Waters with it...ah, well...
My ideal government: Me as president, Al Gore secretary of state, Maxine Waters CIA director, Bill Ayres FBI director, Bernadine Dohrn Attorney General. I'd create a new public broadcasting company to rival the BBC, Michael Moore as its head.
@NaMgKCa " I thought he got chucked out from deviating from the debate after having been warned several times?"
As I remember he was pointing out the other MP's links with sex magazines "Spunk loving sluts" and other businesses for which the MP was linked with which might bring that MP into dispute with the debate.
@NaMgKCa Well surely he knows the rules and knew he would get suspended?. Typical rebellious little leftie, just like Dennis Skinner MP, no respect for the house or it's traditions.
@MRwonderman1 Of course he knew he would be chucked out of the house. I dont think you could say it is typical of the left seeing as Michael Heseltine did the same thing over the poll tax.
it's traditional in british politics. it should be allowed here in america as well as we are permitted freedom of speech and freedom of political expression. this is nothing - PMQ is the best and i enjoy watching it.
Ah,okay, i managed to actually do my research now. haha.
Once the speaker names a member, it is expected that another MP will move a motion against the member which will result in a verbal "aye" or "nay" vote, which, most likely, will lead to a division.
What does it mean when the speaker says "I name the honourable member of the Hayes and Harlington [consitituency]". In this context what is to "name" someone.
It's for the record, but it's also how MP's adress each other in the house. They will never refer to any existing member of the house by name, only be title od simply "My Right Honerable friend"
@OneBigRetard We don't make the "honorable/right honorable" distinction in the States, mainly because we don't have a Privy Council. Our parlimentary customs do tend to be a bit more formal than those of the Commons, however, as senators and congressmen don't address ANYONE in the second person, not even the presiding officer (who always, without exception, refers to him/herself as 'the chair").
For the speajer to say I name that member means he considers that member (MP) to have committed a parliamentary transgression which can lead to the member being suspended from the House.
When he asked for members to confirm if they were For or Against, a verbal majority was not clear so he cleared the gallery so members could vote on the issue,
The member (MP) for Hayes and Harlington was then duly suspended.
I'd accept John's actions if climate change was real, but it is a complete fabrication, developed by left wingers and various socialists who couldn't defeat capitalism intellectually because capitalism is the best system ever devised, so they want to undermine it by fuelling lies about it and making people feel guilty about consumerism
Well, I answered 16 hours ago and you logged on 5 hours ago. No answer then? Was that not the answer you were expecting.
If you can even bother to read reports that are not sanctioned by self appointed experts like Al Gore (who increasingly resemlbes a bull with each passing day) and Kofi Annan, you'd realise climate change is the latest myth dreamt up by lefties to try and undermine capitalist because they couldn't do it in a debate. They'll never win. Most people know it is a lie.
it was 10 years ago i saw my latest white christmas, the snow never comes in december any more, it comes in mid January instead.
to be you seem to be blinded by something if you can not grip that Millions of cars, Millions of factories, waste products being dropped in lakes and rivers etc has an impact on our planet.
We can argue the damages/effects of climate change is and will be in the future but we can't deny it.
We can not deny that our way of life is toxic to tellus,
Of course they produce waste. But it isn't causing planetary warming. Our planet stopped warming in 1998 and no climate scientist has registered an increase in 11 years. Mars is warming up, is that due to human activity?
I can deny it because it is complete wank. I am going to be cremated now, hopefully publically in front of a climate change rally just to piss of those trustafarian twats.
In 50 years the alarmists will still be warming of impending collapse and I will still laugh
I never realised global warming was a commie plot! How foolish of me, I guess the way that capitalist governments have jumped on the bandwagon and not exposed it for the commie rubbish it is just goes to show that the West is really run by Marxists (ie the Labour Party and the Democratic Party), which actually destroys your entire argument because then where is the capitalism? You're either taking the piss or you're mentally handicapped.
I never said it was a commie plot you ringpiece. I said it was a fabrication dreamt up by left wingers and socialists, not commie states. Can you fucking read?
And what is your evidence for this? Do you actually have any evidence at all, or is it all just right wing whining? I can read: presumably to be taken in by a socialist fabrication, the governments would either have to be run by retards or be socialist themselves...
The speaker is calling for order (telling the MP to be quiet basically). The MP grabs the ceremonial mace in the centre of the house and gestures at Geoff Hoon (If the mace is not present then Parliament is officially not in session).
Basically John McDonnal picked up the mace from the commons table. This is simply not the done thing. The Houses of the UK Parliament cannot lawfully meet without the mace present.
The Deputy Speaker 'names' him is the process of suspending him from the house but the MPs have to vote on it hence the call of division. In the end the MP was suspended for 5 days.
The Deputy Speaker is shouting 'order' which is a call for the house to come to order i.e. be quiet.
Godd of him to stick up for the peole and democracy, but going for the mace was WAY too far. Bravo Sir Alan hazelhurst. He'll hopefully be elected full Speaker.
theres a slight over reaction there mate. I'm not sure building a 3rd runway without a commons vote, which is perfectly within constiutional legality, is comparable to the mindless slaughter of millions of people based on their ethnic background.
The majority of English MPs voted against the 3rd runway. Scottish MPs voted For the land clearances it required, so the runway will be built, despite planning being devolved to the Scottish parliament.
I will not deny that there are rules for honourable members of parliament to abide by during parliamentary debates. HOWEVER! It is totally understandable why the MP shouted in the way that he did. He clearly is a passionate man and not only did he raise his voice and shout those words for himself the whole community of Hayes and Harlington did so too. It is HIS HOME, HIS PEOPLE HIS COMMUNITY and anyone with an ounce of care and consideration would not have done anything differently.
Agreed. Neither sides wanted this outcome. It is sad to think that in such a well developed democracy the only way of reinforcing your views is to be chucked out of the House and with no result.
LOL Look at that piece of shit Miliband sitting there! I bet he's thinking to himself - "This Labour government is fucked, and I'm going to be the new leader mwahahahahahahaha". Fucking toff cunt.
TheWackadooFuckhead 3 months ago
Fuckin IRA supporting cunt please please DIE SOON ! you fuckin scumbag!
theblackmafia71 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The words, clear the lobby in this most momentous of occasions, nearly made me ejaculate. Passions indeed were running high!
westernise 3 months ago
they are throwing him out when the "No" clearly outweighed the "ayes"
pcjoel999 4 months ago
@pcjoel999 The deputy speaker called a division, because the MPs weren't unanimous either way. The Tories who in principle were opposed to the 3rd runway shouted 'No', but when it came to the actual vote their whips told them not to actually vote 'No'. So McDonnell was suspended legitimately, and even though I support him clearly he needed to be disciplined somehow.
otleybey 3 months ago
@otleybey oh i see. thank you dor that information. i also support him but i dont think that throwing him out was the right way to discipline him.
pcjoel999 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no such thing as FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN THE UK!
"First ever crown court BANNED rap-poet" (2009-2014)
(video on my page)
#superinjunction
other vids-Poetry/
las vegas tour/
2pac madame tussauds/
Amsterdam coffeeshops/
& graffiti
TheBannedPoet 4 months ago
This video doesn't show the crucial moment of John picking up the mace.
LaurelVentura 6 months ago
mcdonald ..i m lovin it
smokinjoe11 6 months ago
haha what a bunch of children - !
eqphoto 6 months ago
He was out of line to shout - A debate should be amicable
MrOfferp 7 months ago
@MrOfferp Ha, you don't watch British politics much do you, this is why it is brilliant
markgiles125 4 months ago
WE REPRESENT!@$ ORDAH!! WE REPRESENT!! ORDAH!!! WE REPRESENT!!!#%
AsianCriticalCritic 7 months ago
its a shame that in both 2007 and 2010 he did not get enough labour mp's to back him to stand for the leadership
flyingtoilet1 8 months ago
Why is US Politics not as fun to watch as this??? THIS MAKES US politics SEEM SO BORING!!!
SamuelJoaodaSuica 8 months ago 4
@SamuelJoaodaSuica Please stop watching these videos as if you're watching "Big Brother"; Politics is supposed to be productive, not "fun".
daspinguru 8 months ago
@daspinguru
Too late... hahaha
and BigBrother is gay. I don't give a shit about other peoples personal lives... I have my own shit to deal with. But politics is for EVERYONE! :D
SamuelJoaodaSuica 8 months ago
I NAME THE 4 DISLIKERS FOR THE NEGATIVE VOTERS!
Angryification 8 months ago
Why are all these old faggot mother fuckers making decisions of how we live our lives.
Stoned962flyer 9 months ago
@GAZBEROTTEN
Well Heathrow is in the south...
WSWarthog 9 months ago
@GAZBEROTTEN
You know corpses have to be continuously exhumed from grave sites to make space for the new dead, right?
WSWarthog 9 months ago
@GAZBEROTTEN
Imo it's time we stopped digging holes in the ground to bury our dead. It's wasteful of resources.
WSWarthog 9 months ago
Comment removed
Angryification 9 months ago
was he actually suspended?
cknighto 10 months ago
Nimby cunt...there are 60 >million< people in this country - fuck his nimby Home Counties twat constituents. The needs of the country outweighs their wishes for an idyllic Berks / Bucks existence. Fuck off further away from London if you want peace and quiet!
cuntylishus 10 months ago
good on him for passion
mrinvincible2001 10 months ago
was he withdrawn???? If so, thats a bloody disgrace!
stiddlyrehman 11 months ago
Lol the Speaker went mad, Order! Order, Order!! the honourable member must withdraw.. ORDER!!!!
MrSpeaker1995 1 year ago
If only they were more John McDonnells
glennmac88 1 year ago 2
@glennmac88
If only...
fodsaks 9 months ago
The ayes have it the ayes have it
TheReluctantUTuber 1 year ago
And where is Geoff Hoon today? Oh yes, banned from the House of Commons for five years for corruption - not for shouting on behalf of his constituents.
borjon23 1 year ago
You get my vote John
rfitzhen 1 year ago
Fantastic seeing an MP standing up for Constituent.
rsingh 1 year ago
Seems like the nos were louder than the Is. Some were repeated though.
TheWilsonFilmCompany 1 year ago
|I love when someone talks there mind and this happens shows whant comnis state this contry is turning into
screammac 1 year ago
Order! Or-order! We'll have order here! Or-order!!
FUCKING ORDER, GODDAMMIT!!!!!
mormonjoe 1 year ago
if they vote no, he wouldn't be suspended right?
lawyer4817 1 year ago
@lawyer4817 yes
sim18893 1 year ago
@lawyer4817 thats right yes
madabbafan 1 year ago
The guy speaking to him is the clerk who has greater knowledge of what to do than the speaker hence he advises him.
redface626 1 year ago
@redface626 Yes this is spot on there should be three in total. Removing the mace is like puncturing a football mid match, only do it when completely necessary!
NoctisEreptor 1 year ago
@NoctisEreptor I think this was necessary. This is the type of thing that lead labour to lose power. Here they are not representing the people that voted for them but instead they are representing a small special interest much like the Iraq war.
redface626 1 year ago
@redface626 Yes but the point IS to discuss this issue, removing the mace is only acceptable when it turns to "fisticuffs". The very word parliament means French for talking of disscussion. If you remove the mace you're taking matters of the nation into your own hands YOU CAN'T DO THAT!
NoctisEreptor 1 year ago
@NoctisEreptor: Also bear in mind that the Mace represents the Queen's authority that allows Parliament to debate laws. So if you remove it, it means parliament can no longer legislate.
kanenkitten 9 months ago
@kanenkitten I did comment on that in a previous text.
NoctisEreptor 9 months ago
What unforgivable effrontery!
GohModley 1 year ago
He could never be leader of the Labour Party
mrflibble101 1 year ago
Good on you John
deviant526 1 year ago 41
Fucking go on John McDonnell. Love that man.
BeanHead22 1 year ago 3
suspend him from the planet
maclachj1 1 year ago
So, what does 'naming' mean? Is that a motion to suspend a member? And 'Division, clear the lobby', does that mean the house will divide to take a vote?
eamonnca1 1 year ago
@eamonnca1 Parliament is based on secret ballot, to stop politicians getting their heads on spikes or something red hot shoved somewhere private. Today it is merely convention, they call each other "my honourable friend" or whatever. If anyone is named they must leave, I didn't realise a vote was required. The secret ballot is extended to ordinary voters too, and most democratic systems worldwide are based on this.
jacksawild 1 year ago
@jacksawild Interesting. How about PMQs though? When calling out who's asking the next question, the speaker always addresses the MPs by name rather than by constituency, which I always thought was a bit odd. Is there something about PMQs that implies it's potentially not an MP asking the question? Or is it because Prime Minister's Questions is not a 'debate' as such and hence no voting taking place?
eamonnca1 1 year ago
Members are called by name during debates and during any question time. Just a bit of tradition, the Speaker or Deputy Speaker's calling is never written in Hansard unless they say something alongside it.
LukeShoveller 1 year ago
@jacksawild Sorry to correct you but divisions are not secret ballots. The results of divisions of the House and how MPs voted are published in Hansard. The reason members are addressed in the third person is to avoid personal insults and the like.
markdew89 1 year ago
@eamonnca1 To name the honourable member is to suspend the member, yes. 'Division, clear the lobbies' orders the Sergeant-at-Arms and his officials to clear the division lobbies where MPs go to cast their votes. There is the 'Aye' Lobby and the 'No' Lobby.
markdew89 1 year ago
@eamonnca1 A MPs name is not normaly used in the house MPs are usualy refered to as the honerable member for ... . The speaker 'naming' the member means they have comitted unparliamentary behaviour and the Speaker calls for the other MPs to vote to suspend him/her from the house. As the speaker got no clear verbal result he calls for a division where the MPs make a formal vote passing into the 'aye' or 'no' lobbies. 'Clear the lobby' means anyone who's not an MP, visitors etc has to be removed
madabbafan 1 year ago 15
Who was the Tory politician in the 70's who grabbed the Mace and tried to lunge at the Labour government benches?? (the gov had passed a bill nationalizing the Air industry)
bripat22 1 year ago
@bripat22 michael heseltine i believe
justinlau1992 1 year ago
@bripat22 It was Michael Heseltine and his nickname Tarzan was the outcome of his actions.
wobbly585 1 year ago
If you look in the long shot at the beginning you can see the gold mace on the table, and then pause the video one second before the end and you can see it on the front bench to the left
Roxy222uk 1 year ago
Good one John.
MartynInEurope 1 year ago
I never liked hoon
alexmi6rider 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
w wwDOTerepublikDOTcom/en/referrer/FaintyDave
Help your country become the greatest in this massive online social strategy game!
Work, train, fight, run your own company and become rich or get yourself elected as party/country president, do it all at the same time if you like!
YouTubbyComma 1 year ago
i've this many times in the house of commons that after each person speaks some other members stand up for a second or two and then sit down again. why is that?
thanks
19dec1981 1 year ago
@19dec1981 it's because they want to speak, since they havent been chosen they sit back down
ArjunJethwa 1 year ago
Not quite, they are attempting to catch the speaker's eye, so they can speak next.
LukeShoveller 1 year ago
Hear the person speaking in his hear "just name him"
boldertits 1 year ago 2
he is right biger clener plans and more rail laber dont like the facts they carnt gorden will shot them down bring bk real laber
screammac 2 years ago
quick question, what is the significance of standing after someone finishes speaking?
DeftDel 2 years ago
I think it's a show of support? Or maybe a request to speak?
PhilMann93 2 years ago
@PhilMann93 Request to speak.
Yasmar89 1 year ago
They're trying to get the speaker's attention apparently, so they can ask a question.
tamaolemaa 2 years ago
that means they support the argument the speaker was making
yankeesurfer25 2 years ago
@DeftDel to 'catch the eye' of the speaker, so that he allows the person to ask a question hopefully
mc4566 1 year ago
@DeftDel They are attempting to catch the Speaker's eye so that they may be called on to speak.
markdew89 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You can't watch 5 minutes of British politics without somebody using the word "democracy" ...and yet the UK remains constitutionally a monarchy. Ultimately monarchy is not and cannot be democratic.
RWT683 2 years ago
The Queen represents the unity of the nation. The monarch hasn't had much to do with the daily affairs of government since Charles Ist lost the English civil war in the 17th century.
tamaolemaa 2 years ago
But the Queen does still have the powers to take control whenever she wants however she choses not to use these powers by tradition and that it would rob us all of that weekly entertainment we call "Prime Minister's Questions"
kanenkitten 1 year ago
She couldn't though - there would be public outrage.
mrjamest2000 1 year ago
Well yes there would be from a few but I don't think that there would be many protests as most people love The Queen
kanenkitten 1 year ago
@kanenkitten No not just from a few, and if anything parliament would son after dissolve the British Monarchy and turn this country into a republic like the United States.
coneko 1 year ago
@coneko: Well how would they dissolve the monarchy if parliament had already been dissolved? A bit like between now and the election the commons power now lies with the Queen and her Privy Council
kanenkitten 1 year ago
@RWT683 Ultimately, you don't understand the evolution of our democracy. Britain operates a parliamentary democracy wielding the authority of the Monarch. Constitutionaly, the will of the Crown governs the land, but this will is at the direction of the House of Commons (through the Crown's chief advisor: the Prime Minister).
Yasmar89 1 year ago
The British monarch has (in theory) almost limitless power to enact or veto laws, make appointments, conclude treaties, command the military, or jail people and free them at "HM's Pleasure." Just because these powers haven't been used recently doesn't mean they don't exist.
In practice the British PM, (which is not even a legal office, he's 1st Treasury Lord) & cabinet usurp these powers and by means of "gov't bills" and party discipline rule with absolutely no check on their power.
RWT683 1 year ago
@RWT683These powers definitely exist with the Queen as the vessel via which they are exercised each day. The "orders" issued are at the direction of offices over which she has no practical control like the CPS.
The term "Prime Minister" merely refers to the one invited by the Queen to form a government
Initially you seemed to attack Britain for having a Monarch as the Head of State, saying it was incompatable with democracy. Now you are attacking Parliamentary Democracy itself. Please clarify
Yasmar89 1 year ago
I'm saying having a monarch (or indeed a House of Lords) is pointless when the Commons have usurped all the power. But when the PM and his party can do whatever they want it's no better than an absolute monarchy.
I think the UK would do well to at least have a written constitution which sets out the powers of government and balances it between different organs.
Revolutions are necessary from time to time and the UK would seem long overdue.
RWT683 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm saying having a monarch (or indeed a House of Lords) is pointless when the Commons have usurped all the power. But when the PM and his party can do whatever they want it's no better than an absolute monarchy.
I think the UK would do well to at least have a written constitution which sets out the powers of government and balances it between different organs.
Revolutions are necessary from time to time and the UK would seem long overdue.
RWT683 1 year ago
So absolute power by way of parliamentary tyranny is more "democratic" than a regal tyranny how? Because MPs are elected? There are elections in North Korea too -- but like the US and UK (and indeed most countries) the process is rigged.
The point being "democracy" means nothing and all the more so in a country operating a medieval form of government where centuries of corruption has been institutionalized to the point it is called "tradition."
RWT683 1 year ago
I....GET THAT IDIOT OUTTA HERE!!
MrGordongecko2007 2 years ago
No money to build the runway so i think Johnny won. Not being thick or anything but there are airports around England which are big small medium and all that i'm sure there are airports out there which can have more runways or extended runways without disturbing London way?
psweep 2 years ago
How does he decide which way the vote went? He can't have accurately counted how many said "no" and how many "yes" just by glancing like that.
vulnerabledonkey 2 years ago
@vulnerabledonkey Where the speaker can't work out which side has won from a voice vote they call a full "Division", as here. then the MPs must vote in person by walking through the appropriate lobby, Yes to the right side of the chamber, No to the left. When it came to organising this in this case there were actually no MPs prepared to report the results for the No side and the 'Ayes' accordingly won by default.
tmrkPISTOLE 2 years ago
@vulnerabledonkey He doesnt, he calls a division and tells them to clear the lobby which means they all now go vote on that motion, which is weather he should be suspended from the house.
theguywiththeband 2 years ago
It's based more on tradition as to who was more vociferous - clearly the passion was in the nos - but it generally seems to the speaker to have been a split between the measured yes's and the passionate nos. It only really works when there is a blatant majority
dyingfly 2 years ago
John McDonnell for Prime Minister
rfitzhen 2 years ago
It just shows the current state of the labour party, if they do not like something they will get rid of it bury and pretend it is not there.
lowestoftbus 2 years ago
He did remove it. He placed it on the front bench where Dennis Skinner usually sits.
FMcN24 2 years ago
yes, you can see it there at the end
inanebanter 2 years ago
I cant believe he removed the Ceremonial Mace representing Her Majesty's Authority from its rightful place!!
As far as I am aware, the Mace has to be in its place before ANY parliamentary proceedings can take place, so it leaves me wondering why they tried to pass a motion without the Mace in its place...Or does it just have to be 'present' as by I mean in Chamber?
BelfastCityHall 2 years ago
he didn't remove it.
YorkshirePunk02 2 years ago
Look at 1:57 on the Labour benches at the front. The mace sits there. He put it there.
NaMgKCa 2 years ago
your right the mace has to be in place, proceedings in the house of commons can not take place unless the mace is in place
benbarclay20 2 years ago
are you really bothered bya fucking mace? this country is in shit mate. Maces are the last fucker thing on my mind!
DLPBurke 2 years ago
HAHA...
They clear the lobby over that? LOL in Canada's House of Commons that's what's going on the whole time!
StormCrow94 2 years ago
division clear the lobby...
good excuse for an extended liquid lunch chaps. such a pack of warbling idiots, no wonder the country is run by special interest lobbies with corporate and foreign interests instead of the british people. id prefer a dictatorship to this quasi democracy. like gibson said "why swap one tyrant a thousand miles away for a thousand tyrants one mile away" atleast a dictator can be overthrown in a revolution, how do you get rid of all these inbred bastards?
lucasleivia 2 years ago 2
what do you put in place after the dictator is overthrown?
tickleperson2 2 years ago
If it is such a huge decision,should not the British public make it.Like so many situations in the UK,dictatorship rather than democracy governs us.
dave009ish 2 years ago
i think he showed incredible guts and gained alot of respect in my book.
he stood up against the leader of his own party.
Good on him.
hes probably the only labour party MP who gives a shit about the workers anymore
Ilikenuman 2 years ago 2
yes perhaps not all Labour MP's are socialist idiots! I'd like to see McDonnell move over to us (Conservatives)
nrjelley 2 years ago
as if hed move to the conservatives. Hes turned up to many socialist Party meetings regarding the Unision witch hunt.
Ilikenuman 2 years ago
Clearly, nrjelley, you do not know McDonnell. He's one of the few really dark red Labour MPs left, and stood against Brown for the leadership contest on a socialist platform.
EasyPeasy21 2 years ago
I like british politics
stianbirkholz 2 years ago 2
Fail. Parliament of the United Kingdom, why do the English heckle? no sorry get it right United Kingdom: Scottish, English, Welsh and Northern Irish, really bit more intelligence needed
psweep 2 years ago 2
wot?
Kiphillphil 2 years ago
Why do the English heckle ? That's really annoying, and not acceptable in American Politics.
illuminatijews 2 years ago
He didnt get chucked out of the house because he heckled but he actually came down the stairs and took the mace off its standing point and placed it on the benches. Thats why he was suspended. The mace gives authority to the House Of Commons in the name of Her Maj.
heckling is fun. You should see Prime Ministers Questions.
NaMgKCa 2 years ago 16
Manhandling the mace in the US Houses will get you suspended as well. I remember the Sjt-at-arms threatened to break up a quarrel between Rep Waters and Rep Obey. I wished that the Sjt WOULD have thunked Waters with it...ah, well...
columbusmozart 2 years ago
My ideal government: Me as president, Al Gore secretary of state, Maxine Waters CIA director, Bill Ayres FBI director, Bernadine Dohrn Attorney General. I'd create a new public broadcasting company to rival the BBC, Michael Moore as its head.
rkeppler3633 2 years ago
You need to take BBC and rename it to BBQ before Michael Moore will sign on.
RWT683 2 years ago
@NaMgKCa George Galloway got kicked out for speaking his mind
Tzimnewman3 1 year ago
@Tzimnewman3 I thought he got chucked out from deviating from the debate after having been warned several times?
NaMgKCa 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NaMgKCa " I thought he got chucked out from deviating from the debate after having been warned several times?"
As I remember he was pointing out the other MP's links with sex magazines "Spunk loving sluts" and other businesses for which the MP was linked with which might bring that MP into dispute with the debate.
Tzimnewman3 1 year ago
@NaMgKCa Well surely he knows the rules and knew he would get suspended?. Typical rebellious little leftie, just like Dennis Skinner MP, no respect for the house or it's traditions.
MRwonderman1 1 year ago
@MRwonderman1 Of course he knew he would be chucked out of the house. I dont think you could say it is typical of the left seeing as Michael Heseltine did the same thing over the poll tax.
NaMgKCa 1 year ago
it's traditional in british politics. it should be allowed here in america as well as we are permitted freedom of speech and freedom of political expression. this is nothing - PMQ is the best and i enjoy watching it.
asunsetinmyveins 2 years ago
there is passion in english politics.
DMEB 2 years ago
Who gives a fuck? atleast we get things done
TheOrangeFondler 2 years ago
It's a very old tradition. I agree it's annoying but such is life!
digbycurrents 2 years ago
I really wish it was the same in the US, they should be required to be there and speak up for the people they swore an oath to represent.
zeugmatis 2 years ago 3
@zeugmatis Bernie Sanders dude, Bernie Sanders.
clapton1958 11 months ago
did he said the ayes or the noes have it?
knight7fox2 2 years ago
No, that's why he called for a division...they need to go vote on it.
columbusmozart 2 years ago
he wasn't suspended, they were divided
ajr2006 2 years ago
Sir Alan is the hero for his finesse, but, as always, the chair goes unnoticed!!!!!!!!!!
Oban277 2 years ago
that was geroge galloway now john mcdonnell?
muffles12 2 years ago
Who is the speaker? Michael Martin was speaker in January 2009; is that a deputy?
weeblewobble4 2 years ago
to get the attention of the speaker, they want to speak :)
the speaker then calls the member :)
AidanJGiles 2 years ago
thanks :)
Ezzooooo 2 years ago
i am not British .. can anyone please tell me why some people stand up during the discussion and sit down back again ?
Ezzooooo 2 years ago
happy to oblige
during a debate, you stand up to be selected to speak by the speaker. once someone is selected they have to sit down.
paulw123321 2 years ago
Ah,okay, i managed to actually do my research now. haha.
Once the speaker names a member, it is expected that another MP will move a motion against the member which will result in a verbal "aye" or "nay" vote, which, most likely, will lead to a division.
YoshiLee 2 years ago
It only leads to a division if a majority cannot be heard from the verbal responses.
judas21 2 years ago
What does it mean when the speaker says "I name the honourable member of the Hayes and Harlington [consitituency]". In this context what is to "name" someone.
benz303b 2 years ago
I'm pretty sure that's just for the record, to record that the person in question is speaking out of turn.
I can't confirm that though.
YoshiLee 2 years ago
It's for the record, but it's also how MP's adress each other in the house. They will never refer to any existing member of the house by name, only be title od simply "My Right Honerable friend"
gardengnome1981 2 years ago
Or honourable friend, or if opposition, 'honourable gentlemen/member'
OneBigRetard 2 years ago
Same in the US Congress, "The (honorable) member from (the state of) xxx"
columbusmozart 2 years ago
Yes. Obviously derived from the UK system.
It is important in signifying the people represented rather than the personality/ego of the member.
I don't think the US has the same distinctions of honourable member/friend. or 'right-honourable'.
OneBigRetard 2 years ago
@OneBigRetard We don't make the "honorable/right honorable" distinction in the States, mainly because we don't have a Privy Council. Our parlimentary customs do tend to be a bit more formal than those of the Commons, however, as senators and congressmen don't address ANYONE in the second person, not even the presiding officer (who always, without exception, refers to him/herself as 'the chair").
cjallen2 8 months ago
It's the formal way of chucking out any unruly MP's.
moshabee 2 years ago
For the speajer to say I name that member means he considers that member (MP) to have committed a parliamentary transgression which can lead to the member being suspended from the House.
When he asked for members to confirm if they were For or Against, a verbal majority was not clear so he cleared the gallery so members could vote on the issue,
The member (MP) for Hayes and Harlington was then duly suspended.
therecipenetwork 2 years ago
I'd accept John's actions if climate change was real, but it is a complete fabrication, developed by left wingers and various socialists who couldn't defeat capitalism intellectually because capitalism is the best system ever devised, so they want to undermine it by fuelling lies about it and making people feel guilty about consumerism
Mickmars90 2 years ago
how many white christmas have you experience the last 10 years?
Falsare 2 years ago
3. You?
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Well, I answered 16 hours ago and you logged on 5 hours ago. No answer then? Was that not the answer you were expecting.
If you can even bother to read reports that are not sanctioned by self appointed experts like Al Gore (who increasingly resemlbes a bull with each passing day) and Kofi Annan, you'd realise climate change is the latest myth dreamt up by lefties to try and undermine capitalist because they couldn't do it in a debate. They'll never win. Most people know it is a lie.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Mickmars90:
it was 10 years ago i saw my latest white christmas, the snow never comes in december any more, it comes in mid January instead.
to be you seem to be blinded by something if you can not grip that Millions of cars, Millions of factories, waste products being dropped in lakes and rivers etc has an impact on our planet.
We can argue the damages/effects of climate change is and will be in the future but we can't deny it.
We can not deny that our way of life is toxic to tellus,
do you?
Falsare 2 years ago
Of course they produce waste. But it isn't causing planetary warming. Our planet stopped warming in 1998 and no climate scientist has registered an increase in 11 years. Mars is warming up, is that due to human activity?
I can deny it because it is complete wank. I am going to be cremated now, hopefully publically in front of a climate change rally just to piss of those trustafarian twats.
In 50 years the alarmists will still be warming of impending collapse and I will still laugh
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Come to Canada we still get snow drifts 7 feet high
Cnd1867 2 years ago
I never realised global warming was a commie plot! How foolish of me, I guess the way that capitalist governments have jumped on the bandwagon and not exposed it for the commie rubbish it is just goes to show that the West is really run by Marxists (ie the Labour Party and the Democratic Party), which actually destroys your entire argument because then where is the capitalism? You're either taking the piss or you're mentally handicapped.
otleybey 2 years ago
I never said it was a commie plot you ringpiece. I said it was a fabrication dreamt up by left wingers and socialists, not commie states. Can you fucking read?
Mickmars90 2 years ago
And what is your evidence for this? Do you actually have any evidence at all, or is it all just right wing whining? I can read: presumably to be taken in by a socialist fabrication, the governments would either have to be run by retards or be socialist themselves...
otleybey 2 years ago
I can't reply now but I will send you a private message with tonnes of stuff later on.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Unfortunately I don't understand what's going on. Can someone help me please?
Who gets suspended and why, and what is the word that the speaker says all the time?
(I'm not British)
phantasiehamster 2 years ago
The speaker is calling for order (telling the MP to be quiet basically). The MP grabs the ceremonial mace in the centre of the house and gestures at Geoff Hoon (If the mace is not present then Parliament is officially not in session).
ozzymcosborne 2 years ago
Basically John McDonnal picked up the mace from the commons table. This is simply not the done thing. The Houses of the UK Parliament cannot lawfully meet without the mace present.
The Deputy Speaker 'names' him is the process of suspending him from the house but the MPs have to vote on it hence the call of division. In the end the MP was suspended for 5 days.
The Deputy Speaker is shouting 'order' which is a call for the house to come to order i.e. be quiet.
madabbafan 2 years ago
Godd of him to stick up for the peole and democracy, but going for the mace was WAY too far. Bravo Sir Alan hazelhurst. He'll hopefully be elected full Speaker.
Hoddersrevenge 2 years ago
theres a slight over reaction there mate. I'm not sure building a 3rd runway without a commons vote, which is perfectly within constiutional legality, is comparable to the mindless slaughter of millions of people based on their ethnic background.
briggsyNF 2 years ago 2
The majority of English MPs voted against the 3rd runway. Scottish MPs voted For the land clearances it required, so the runway will be built, despite planning being devolved to the Scottish parliament.
That's what Labour did for democracy.
downourstreet 2 years ago
the tradition of MPs allowed to bring swords into the commons should be reinstated. would be much more entertaining
godlikemicko 2 years ago 3
They are exactly two swords width apart on either side. Maybe something with a bit more range.
Cross bows?
ApathyStillRoars 2 years ago
I will not deny that there are rules for honourable members of parliament to abide by during parliamentary debates. HOWEVER! It is totally understandable why the MP shouted in the way that he did. He clearly is a passionate man and not only did he raise his voice and shout those words for himself the whole community of Hayes and Harlington did so too. It is HIS HOME, HIS PEOPLE HIS COMMUNITY and anyone with an ounce of care and consideration would not have done anything differently.
Maypolitics 2 years ago 3
'he couldve spoken out without SHOUTING IT.'
Agreed. Neither sides wanted this outcome. It is sad to think that in such a well developed democracy the only way of reinforcing your views is to be chucked out of the House and with no result.
iiyama74 2 years ago
here, here
GohModley 2 years ago
The nos had it!
BLAKESTONED 2 years ago 12
Go McDonnell! Finally, an MP who stands up for the people - and not just the people of his country or constituency either.
dunctonhoney 2 years ago 9