Parliamentary business

The basic procedure by which the Commons conducts its business is by debate on

a particular proposal, followed by a resolution which either accepts or rejects the

proposal. If MPs have to vote for or against a particular proposal they do this by

walking through one of two corridors at the side of the House - one side for the

'Ayes' (those who agree with the proposal) and the other for the 'Noes' (those who

disagree).

But the resolutions of the Commons are only part of its activities. There are also

the committees. Some committees are appointed to examine particular proposals

for laws, but there are also permanent committees whose job is to investigate the

activities of government in a particular field. They are becoming an increasingly

important part of the business of the Commons.

The party system in Parliament

Most divisions take place along party lines. MPs know that they owe their position

to their party, so they nearly always vote the way that their party tells them to. The

people whose job is to make sure that MPs do this are called the Whips. Each of

the two major parties has several MPs who perform this role. It is their job to

inform all MPs in their party how they should vote. By tradition, if the government

loses a vote in Parliament on a very important matter, it has to resign. Therefore,

when there is a division on such a matter, MPs are expected to go to the House and

vote even if they have not been the during the debate.

The Whips act as intermediaries between the backbenchers and the frontbench of a

party. They keep the party leadership informed about backbench opinion. They are

powerful people. Because they 'have the ear' of the party leaders, they can

influence which backbenchers get promoted to the front bench. For reasons such as

this, 'rebellions' among a group of MPs (in which they vote against their party) are

very rare.

Sometimes, the major parties allow a 'free vote', when MPs vote according to their

own beliefs and not according to party policy. Some quite important decisions,

such as the abolition of the death penalty or allowing TV cameras into the

Commons have been made in this way.

The House of Lords

Most parliamentary systems have a second chamber. The British one is called the

House of Lords. Like some other second chambers, the House of Lords has no real

power and only limited influence, although the Lords can delay a bill, they cannot

stop it becoming law in the end, even if they continue to refuse it. Its role,

therefore, is consultative one. In the Lords, bills can be discussed in more detail

than the busy Commons has time for - and in this way irregularities or

inconsistencies in these proposals can be avoided before they become law. In

addition, the Lords act as a forum for discussion, and can sometimes bring to

attention matters that the Commons has been ignoring. Most importantly of all, it

is argued, the Lords can act as a check on any governments which, through their

control of the Commons, are becoming too dictatorial.

But who are the members of the House of Lords and how do they get there? Its

name suggests that its members are aristocrats. In fact, only a very small

proportion of them are there by hereditary right and even these are unlikely to be

there for much longer. It took Britain a long time to reform this undemocratic

aspect of its political system. Until 1958, all of the Lords were indeed aristocrats.

Then the first step was taken. A law was passed which made it possible to award

‘life peerages’ through the honours system. These gave people entitlement to sit in

the Lords but not the children of these people. During the second half of the

twentieth century, the life peerage system established itself as a means of finding a

place in public life for distinguished older politicians who no longer wished to be

as busy as an MP in the Commons but still wished to voice their opinions in a

public forum.

The next step was taken in 1999, when the number of aristocrats with the right to

sit in the Lords was limited to 92 (about 15% of the total members). At the same

time, the numbers of life-peerage appointments was increased.

It is not clear what the next step will be. At the moment nobody can agree on the

best way to compose the House of Lords. Many people believe members should be

elected. But how? And how long should they stay as members? (There would be

no point in simply replicating the model of election of MPs in the Commons.) It is

widely believed that the value of the Lords lies in the fact that its members do not

depend on party politics for their positions. Because they are there for life, they do

not have to worry about losing their positions. This means they can take decisions

independently, purely on the merits of a case. Others argue that the life-peerage

system should remain. This, however, raises the question of who appoints them. At

present, they are appointed either on the recommendation of the Prime Minister,

political parties or an independent body (set up in 2000) called the House of Lords

Appointments Commission.

MORE INFORMATION ON THE TOPIC

Hansard

This is the name given to the daily verbatim reports of everything that has been

said in the Commons. They are published within 48 hours of the day they cover.

Frontbenchers and backbenchers

Although MPs do not have their own personal seats in the Commons, there are two

seating areas reserved for particular MPs. These areas are the front benches on

either side of the House. These benches are where the leading members of the

governing party (i.e. ministers) and the leading members of the main opposition

party sit. These people are thus known as frontbenchers. MPs who do not hold a

government post or a post in the shadow cabinet are known as backbenchers.

When the Commons sits

The parliamentary day used to run from 2.30 p.m. to 10.30 p.m. But in 2003, the

hours were changed, with sessions starting in the morning and finishing by early

evening. The intention was to allow MPs more time with their families and to

present a more normal, sober, nine-to-five image to the public.

The change was also a recognition that, with so many more women MPs than

before, some of them with young children, the Commons is no longer a

gentleman's club.

But the new hours were very unpopular, and not only with male MPs. Mornings

have always been used for committee work, and now these committees had to start

working before 9 a.m. Some MPs complained they no longer had time to drop their

children off at school. Others, who did not live near London and so could not

return to their homes anyway, wandered around in the evening like lost souls. The

new system meant MPs had to cram all their other duties into a much shorter

period.