This article was nominated for deletion on 23 September 2015. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
JJ, why did you reverse the order of the paragraphs? Mr. Jones 21:54, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Were there actually any other House of Commons than the British, Canadian, and Irish ones? If so, which? I note that the Australian lower house was never called this. Morwen - Talk 14:05, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
"Unreformed" seems a bit unfair; after all it's the one there is, and being what it is, it seems obvious that it cannot have been reformed. I think these articles should be merged. [unsigned comment]
I agree. The article "British House of Commons" is far more detailed. "House of Commons" should redirect there. If theres anything in this article thats not in the other one then it should be put in and this one deleted. Its just taking up page space and misleading people. [unsigned comment]
Could we get togetther with the British, Irish and Canadian pages and get an etymology on "Commons" that we all agree with? Once we have that agreed-up definition, the other pages can defer to this page for the etymology of the phrase. Personally, I like the Canadian one. -- Fplay 18:56, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
The word commons does not refer to the fact that the House of Commons represents the commoners of England. It refers to the fact that the members were elected from the commons (i.e. common areas) of England. Feudalism was based very much on land holdings. Therefore the House of Peers (Lords) represented those areas of land held by peers. The Commons represented those cities and towns which had been granted their freedom from Royal or baronial control. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.29.10 ( talk) 07:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Can we get some verbage on Lower House meeting procedure? All those grunts and groans, the function of the Speaker, the way everyone is addressed indirectly, etc. This is a unique procedure and it's inclusion here would inflate the content and interest of this entry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dick Hyman ( talk • contribs) .
for what reason is that photograph of the empty chamber a candidate for speedy deletion? It was precisely what I was seeking when I searched House of Commons... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.222.42 ( talk) 21:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
For one thing, it's implicitly contradictory due to the unresolved etymology issue described above (is "Commons" a reference to the "third estate" or to the communities represented in that house?). For another, this language creates an inaccurate impression: The commons represented commoners, such as members of craft guilds, burghers, and tenants. Other estates included the prelates, nobles, merchants and knights. The British House of Commons was created to serve as the political outlet for this "commons" class, while the elite estates were represented in the House of Lords. This sounds like the "commons" included guild members, burghers, and tenants, but not merchants and knights. As I understand it, this is inaccurate on two grounds, because tenants (not being "forty shilling freeholders") were not represented in the House of Commons for much of its history, while merchants and knights are commoners and were represented in that house. For example, the representatives of the counties in the House of Commons are called "knights of the shire." PubliusFL ( talk) 19:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Google this, and if anyone knows please give me an answer as to why an MP would repeatedly ask, "To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for [insert today's date]}." Is this some sort of parlimentary way of getting priority to speak? Thanks, from a Yank. DOR (HK) ( talk) 07:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
The reason for asking the Prime Minister about his/her engagements is because, until recently, any member of the Cabinet could answer the posed question, allowing the Prime Minister to avoid answering questions himself, but once someone answers a question, he is obliged to answer follow-up questions (on any topic). The only question that the Prime Minister had to answer personally was his/her list of engagements for the day; hence he/she is traditionally asked this question first, and all subsequent questions are follow-up questions, forcing the Prime Minister to answer the questions himself/herself. Occasionally the first question tabled is on a specific area of policy, but this is rare, as it would allow the Prime Minister to prepare a response in advance; the non-descript question allows some chance of catching him/her out with an unexpected supplementary question.
Not that the house of commons was ever that house of the common people which it is sometimes supposed to have been. For "commons" means "communes"; and while "communes" have commonly been popular organizations, the term might in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries be applied to any association or confederacy. . . "commune of communes" as the house of commons was called . . . But the "communes" or "communitates" which gave their name to the house of commons, were lawful and orderly, comprehensive, but not democratic associations. They were simply the shires or counties of England, and the full county courts in which the knights of the shires were chosen did not include the "common" people.
From the recent citation I've added to this article. Srnec ( talk) 23:37, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I propose to merge
House of Commons of the United Kingdom into
House of Commons. There is nothing in "
House of Commons" that isn't already covered elsewhere and nothing more needs to be there than is already present at "
House of Commons (disambiguation)". Per
WP:COMMONNAME, the present-day British example is the most frequently referred to, and the
Canadian one is the only other one in existence. All the others are either proposed, historical, or were forbears or antecedents to the Westminster parliament, after which the Canadian one was consciously modelled.
GPinkerton (
talk) 08:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
(in the UK) the elected chamber of parliament
{{
cite book}}
: |website=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)(in the UK) the elected chamber of parliament.
{{
cite book}}
: |website=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)Lower House of the British Parliament. The Upper House is the unelected House of Lords.
The elected house of the UK Parliament
The elected house of the UK Parliament. It is composed of 650 Members of Parliament (MPs), representing single member constituencies (although the number fluctuates with each Boundary Commission review).
(in the UK) the elected chamber of Parliament
{{
cite book}}
: |website=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)(in the UK and Canada) the elected chamber of Parliament.
{{
cite book}}
: |website=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)noun (in Canada and the UK). 1. the lower house of Parliament, composed of elected members. 2. the building in which this assembly meets.
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)House of Commons, also called Commons, popularly elected legislative body of the bicameral British Parliament. Although it is technically the lower house, the House of Commons is predominant over the House of Lords, and the name "Parliament" is often used to refer to the House of Commons alone.
Parliament of Canada, the Crown, the Senate, and the House of Commons of Canada, which, according to the British North America Act (Constitution Act) of 1867, are the institutions that together create Canadian laws. When Parliament is referred to in some formal usages, all three institutions are included. In common usage, however, the legislative branch of government—the House of Commons and the Senate—is often equated with Parliament.
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)and referred to the Westminster lower house a the House of Commons without qualification.In which sentence? 207.161.86.162 ( talk) 08:18, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 23 September 2015. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
JJ, why did you reverse the order of the paragraphs? Mr. Jones 21:54, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Were there actually any other House of Commons than the British, Canadian, and Irish ones? If so, which? I note that the Australian lower house was never called this. Morwen - Talk 14:05, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
"Unreformed" seems a bit unfair; after all it's the one there is, and being what it is, it seems obvious that it cannot have been reformed. I think these articles should be merged. [unsigned comment]
I agree. The article "British House of Commons" is far more detailed. "House of Commons" should redirect there. If theres anything in this article thats not in the other one then it should be put in and this one deleted. Its just taking up page space and misleading people. [unsigned comment]
Could we get togetther with the British, Irish and Canadian pages and get an etymology on "Commons" that we all agree with? Once we have that agreed-up definition, the other pages can defer to this page for the etymology of the phrase. Personally, I like the Canadian one. -- Fplay 18:56, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
The word commons does not refer to the fact that the House of Commons represents the commoners of England. It refers to the fact that the members were elected from the commons (i.e. common areas) of England. Feudalism was based very much on land holdings. Therefore the House of Peers (Lords) represented those areas of land held by peers. The Commons represented those cities and towns which had been granted their freedom from Royal or baronial control. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.29.10 ( talk) 07:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Can we get some verbage on Lower House meeting procedure? All those grunts and groans, the function of the Speaker, the way everyone is addressed indirectly, etc. This is a unique procedure and it's inclusion here would inflate the content and interest of this entry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dick Hyman ( talk • contribs) .
for what reason is that photograph of the empty chamber a candidate for speedy deletion? It was precisely what I was seeking when I searched House of Commons... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.222.42 ( talk) 21:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
For one thing, it's implicitly contradictory due to the unresolved etymology issue described above (is "Commons" a reference to the "third estate" or to the communities represented in that house?). For another, this language creates an inaccurate impression: The commons represented commoners, such as members of craft guilds, burghers, and tenants. Other estates included the prelates, nobles, merchants and knights. The British House of Commons was created to serve as the political outlet for this "commons" class, while the elite estates were represented in the House of Lords. This sounds like the "commons" included guild members, burghers, and tenants, but not merchants and knights. As I understand it, this is inaccurate on two grounds, because tenants (not being "forty shilling freeholders") were not represented in the House of Commons for much of its history, while merchants and knights are commoners and were represented in that house. For example, the representatives of the counties in the House of Commons are called "knights of the shire." PubliusFL ( talk) 19:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Google this, and if anyone knows please give me an answer as to why an MP would repeatedly ask, "To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for [insert today's date]}." Is this some sort of parlimentary way of getting priority to speak? Thanks, from a Yank. DOR (HK) ( talk) 07:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
The reason for asking the Prime Minister about his/her engagements is because, until recently, any member of the Cabinet could answer the posed question, allowing the Prime Minister to avoid answering questions himself, but once someone answers a question, he is obliged to answer follow-up questions (on any topic). The only question that the Prime Minister had to answer personally was his/her list of engagements for the day; hence he/she is traditionally asked this question first, and all subsequent questions are follow-up questions, forcing the Prime Minister to answer the questions himself/herself. Occasionally the first question tabled is on a specific area of policy, but this is rare, as it would allow the Prime Minister to prepare a response in advance; the non-descript question allows some chance of catching him/her out with an unexpected supplementary question.
Not that the house of commons was ever that house of the common people which it is sometimes supposed to have been. For "commons" means "communes"; and while "communes" have commonly been popular organizations, the term might in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries be applied to any association or confederacy. . . "commune of communes" as the house of commons was called . . . But the "communes" or "communitates" which gave their name to the house of commons, were lawful and orderly, comprehensive, but not democratic associations. They were simply the shires or counties of England, and the full county courts in which the knights of the shires were chosen did not include the "common" people.
From the recent citation I've added to this article. Srnec ( talk) 23:37, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I propose to merge
House of Commons of the United Kingdom into
House of Commons. There is nothing in "
House of Commons" that isn't already covered elsewhere and nothing more needs to be there than is already present at "
House of Commons (disambiguation)". Per
WP:COMMONNAME, the present-day British example is the most frequently referred to, and the
Canadian one is the only other one in existence. All the others are either proposed, historical, or were forbears or antecedents to the Westminster parliament, after which the Canadian one was consciously modelled.
GPinkerton (
talk) 08:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
(in the UK) the elected chamber of parliament
{{
cite book}}
: |website=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)(in the UK) the elected chamber of parliament.
{{
cite book}}
: |website=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)Lower House of the British Parliament. The Upper House is the unelected House of Lords.
The elected house of the UK Parliament
The elected house of the UK Parliament. It is composed of 650 Members of Parliament (MPs), representing single member constituencies (although the number fluctuates with each Boundary Commission review).
(in the UK) the elected chamber of Parliament
{{
cite book}}
: |website=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)(in the UK and Canada) the elected chamber of Parliament.
{{
cite book}}
: |website=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)noun (in Canada and the UK). 1. the lower house of Parliament, composed of elected members. 2. the building in which this assembly meets.
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)House of Commons, also called Commons, popularly elected legislative body of the bicameral British Parliament. Although it is technically the lower house, the House of Commons is predominant over the House of Lords, and the name "Parliament" is often used to refer to the House of Commons alone.
Parliament of Canada, the Crown, the Senate, and the House of Commons of Canada, which, according to the British North America Act (Constitution Act) of 1867, are the institutions that together create Canadian laws. When Parliament is referred to in some formal usages, all three institutions are included. In common usage, however, the legislative branch of government—the House of Commons and the Senate—is often equated with Parliament.
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)and referred to the Westminster lower house a the House of Commons without qualification.In which sentence? 207.161.86.162 ( talk) 08:18, 11 November 2020 (UTC)