![[Home]](http://www.bayleshanks.com/cartoonbayle.png)
I define a "parliamentary procedure" as a procedure by which a group of entities produces an utterance which is attributed to the group.
However, this page also contains notes on other codified "protocols" or "rules of procedure" designed for use in communications between groups of intelligent entities.
There are two reasons that i am interested in this stuff:
"Parliamentary authorities" are codifications of parliamentary procedure intended for general use. In this section I will also list English-language codifications of the procedures used by various specific groups which are high-profile enough that one may assume that they attempted to to create a "good" procedure (I doubt that "high-profile" correlates highly with goodness of procedure, but I have to winnow the list somehow -- I don't want to include every neighborhood rotary club's procedure, because I intend to actually read most of these someday), as well as comprehensive synthetic or comparative works.
When should traditional parliamentary procedure, such as Robert's Rules, be used?
who should the chair be? someone who knows the rules and is good at conducting meetings. also, someone who can command enough respect to get other ppl to accept their rulings and shut up when the chair says its not their turn to speak.
See also [notes-books-parliamentaryProcedureToolOfLeadership] and [notes-books-parliamentaryLawForTheLayman].
Terms that are (or once were) forbidden in the House of Commons: lie, liar, villain, hypocrite, pharisee, criminal, slanderer, traitor, hooligan, blackguard, murderer, cad, insulting dog, swine, stool-pigeons, bastard. And maybe impertinence imprudence, rude remarks, ruffianism, gross calumny, maglignant slander, malignant attack, scurrilous, dishonest, vicious, vulgar, corrupt, Pecksniffian cant, blether, cheat.
Apparently banned by the Erskine May rules.
"Words or phrases find their way into the index simply by being used. When a member transgresses, he is called to account by the speaker ... or by a fellow member and, if the offender is forced to withdraw his words, they thereupon become anathema for all time. If a member should refuse to obey the Speaker, he may be banished from the House for the rest of the day." -- Cheddar Harris, "Rt. Hon. Restraint", The New York Times Magazine, Apr 8 1951 p. 48, via O'Brien, Parliamentary Law for the Layman.
" Murderer, criminal and liar still resonate and all are banned, as they are seen as inconsistent with an MP's most important right under parliamentary privilege – to speak freely without fear of legal action on grounds of slander. In reality, MPs are more often suspended for persistently challenging a Speaker's ruling, not for calling William Hague a "foetus" as Tony Banks did (at a Labour conference) or Nicholas Soames a "one-man food mountain" (as he did in the Commons).
But MPs are still named and ordered out from time to time. Last year, leftwinger John McDonnell? was outed for grappling with the Mace, symbol of Commons authority – something that did not happen to Michael Heseltine when he swung it round his head in 1976 (he apologised the next day).
In 1984 Tam Dalyell was ordered out for accusing Margaret Thatcher of lying over the sinking of the Argentine cruiser, Belgrano, and again in 1988 (ditto). Skinner was also put out in 1984 for insisting that Mrs T would bribe judges.
Never a man to waste a good line, Skinner was also named in 2005 for his comment on disappointing growth rates in the Tory 70s and 80s. "The only thing growing were the lines of coke in front of boy George [Osborne] and the rest of them," he said. Out he went. " -- http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jun/09/heckle-house-commons
idea: maybe have these restrictions ordinarily, but have a special main motion in order to make accusations of this nature (does this exist already)
