The behavior of Members of Parliament (MPs) in the British House of Commons can sometimes appear noisy and rowdy, especially during certain proceedings like Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs). There are a few reasons behind this tradition and the way MPs behave:
Historical Tradition: The noisy and adversarial nature of the House of Commons can be traced back to its historical roots. The UK Parliament has a long history of robust debates, and the tradition of heated discussions and challenges to authority goes back centuries.
Confrontational Politics: The adversarial system of politics in the UK, where the government and opposition face off against each other, often results in lively debates and confrontations during parliamentary sessions.
Holding the Government to Account: Part of the role of the opposition is to scrutinize and challenge the government. By making noise and challenging speakers from the government, the opposition aims to hold them accountable and highlight their weaknesses or controversial decisions.
PMQs Format: Prime Minister's Questions is a weekly session where the Prime Minister responds to questions from MPs, including the Leader of the Opposition. The PMQs format is intentionally confrontational and has evolved into a theatrical and dramatic event, where MPs often try to score political points.
Speaker's Role: The Speaker of the House of Commons is responsible for maintaining order during debates. The Speaker's interventions, such as calling MPs to order or asking them to be quiet, are part of the parliamentary procedure and add to the drama.
Public Attention: The lively debates and occasional raucous behavior in the House of Commons can attract media attention and keep the public engaged in politics.
It's important to note that while the behavior may seem rude or noisy to some, it is generally seen as a part of the UK's parliamentary culture. However, there have been discussions about potential reforms to encourage more respectful and civil debates in the House of Commons, as some argue that the current style of engagement can be off-putting to the public and detract from substantive policy discussions.