Freedom of speech

Oh yes, Jalima. Much easier online.

online I hope, not physically

Yes, it is useful if you want to follow something up.

I find Hansard very interesting. I check it quite regularly when debates about subjects or MPs I am interested in are drawn to my attention by this website.

www.theyworkforyou.com/

I get emails sent whenever NHS is mentioned in debates, either in the house or even written responses.
I also track my MP.

If you could be bothered to plough your way through it (Hansard I mean).
I wouldn't choose to unless I had to.

right through primary and high school .... well, nearly all the way through Ankers

Rigby I think if you try to peddle Ankers False Information then someone needs to put it right, especially if she did not know.
Thanks Welshwife you put it very succinctly.

rig got it in one.

I never did 1 precis as far as I can remember Jalima. Though my memory of school days is not what it might be.

Hansard is totally reliable. Wonderful.

I think we should stop trying to educate Ankers I rather think she knows exactly how many beans make five and exactly what Hansard is.

If Hansard is not a reliable source then I don't know what is really.

Here you are Ankers
Members’ words are recorded by Hansard reporters and then edited to remove repetitions and obvious mistakes but without taking away from the meaning. The text of debates in the Commons and Lords is published online during the day - a speech is made available about three hours after a Member has finished delivering it.

The paper version of Hansard is produced by 6 am the following day. Bound final versions follow, proofread to eliminate any errors that may have occurred in the original.

Not edited to change any meaning politically, only proof-reading type of editing and an extremely useful and accessible source of information which I rarely access since I retired.

ps didn't you do endless precis at school Ankers; that is not what happens with Hansard, rigorous precis by an under-qualified person is not what happens as an omission could change the whole emphasis of the debate.

If Hansard is not reliable why is it used as the true record of HoC business - a team of reporters take the speeches down verbatim.

No , Hansard is not reliable at all. Ankers pull the other one

Rigby46. When a poster readily admits to things, then alarm bells ring for myself and others. I seem to behind the curve in some respects. As another poster says, I got there in the end or words to that effect.

I have had to look up what precis means.

Where do I find such things?

While I am about it, I had not really heard of Hansard before either.
Is that a totally reliable source? I presume it is? And where is that kept[I am not brilliant at googling].
Are there sources that posters regularly look at daily that are not easily available?

Well there you go , I found the quote very easily - sorry Ankers looking for another fake news story were you?

In terms of Bercow's remain vote, I don't see that as breaching impartiality. He obviously will have his own views on many (all) matters and I can't see that it's a problem if we know what the are. If there is no clear evidence of bias in his refereeing of Brexit debates, that's the end of the matter in my book. But the Trump speech was different. An invitation to speak is in the gift of the speakers and the Lord Chamberlain, but I've always understood, and all I've read supports the view, that the speakers are meant to ensure they are reflecting the views of their respective houses before they make decisions of that sort.

Ah, found it now. You didn't say it was a precis.

“I think that the revelation that [Bercow] voted remain, actually, I was a bit surprised, because we had been told privately that we thought he was sympathetic to our cause, but it’s after the referendum, [and] I don’t think that I’ve seen any evidence that the way he has voted has influenced the way he has behaved in the chamber."

Whittingdale's actual words.

I can't find it either Ankers, but I'm sure durhamjen will get back to you soon

And again, your point is ana?

(on the political threads, of course. Some don't seem to post anywhere else on GN)
And your point is ana ?

I can't find it either Ankers, but I'm sure durhamjen will get back to you soon.

I think Bercow had no need to ask MPs about what he should say.

www.parliament.uk/edm/2016-17/890

No Conservative members signed, but there is no EDM asking for him to come and talk to them, which there could have been.

Which article in the guardian does that come form durhamjen. I have googled twice and cant find it.

(on the political threads, of course. Some don't seem to post anywhere else on GN)

Well, GracesgranMk2, as those on the left post a lot more than those on the right, and most of them voted to Remain, I rest my case.

I've never had any pearls to clutch. Doesn't fit in with my lifestyle.