Abstract
In this chapter, we explore the phenomenon of disruptive behaviour by Members of Parliament (MPs) during parliamentary debates. We comparatively examine disruptive performances by MPs in their institutional contexts to understand the relationship between parliament and elected representatives and the performance of deliberation and representation. We focus on the three selected cases of India, South Africa and the United Kingdom, all of which have witnessed disruptive behaviour in their national parliaments but with varying form, frequency, severity and institutional response and with varied meaning and significance attributed.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aimitage, R 2013. ‘Peace and Quiet in the British House of Commons, 1990–2010’, Democratization, 20(3): 456–477
Boothroyd, B. 2001. Betty Boothroyd: The Autobiography. London: Century.
BPST, n.d. Parliamentary Etiquette and Manners. Training video produced by Bureau of Parliamentary Studies and Training, Parliament of India, New Delhi.
Britton, H.E. 2005. Women in the South African Parliament: From Resistance to Governance. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Chatterjee, S. 2010. Keeping the Faith: Memoirs of a Parliamentarian. Noida: Harper Collins
Cowley, P. 2002. Revolts and Rebellions: Parliamentary Voting under Blair. London: Politico’s.
Feinstein, A. 2010. After the Party: Corruption, the ANC and South Africa’s Uncertain Future, 2nd ed. London: Verso.
Hansard Society. 2014. Tuned in or Turned off? Public Attitudes to Prime Minister’s Questions. London: Hansard Society. Available at: http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/wp-content /uploads/2014/02/Tuned~in~or~Tumed-off-Public-attitudes-to-PMQs.pdf, accessed 19 March 2014.
Hay, C. 1999. The Political Economy of New Labour: Labouring under False Pretences. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Johnson, R.E. 2013. ‘Disrupting the South African Parliament: Performing Opposition 1994–2010’, Democratization, 20(3): 478–500.
Judge, D. 1992. ‘Disorder in the “Frustration” Parliaments of Thatcherite Britain’, Political Studies, 40(3): 532–553.
Kerr, P. 2001. Post-War British Politics: From Conflict to Consensus. London: Routledge.
Lok Sabha Secretariat. 2005. Parliamentary Debates, 3rd edn., March 2005. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat.
National Assembly (NA) Debates. 1997–2006. First — Third Parliament, vols. 15, 20, 25, 96, 97. Cape Town: The Government Printer.
National Social Watch Coalition. 2009. Citizens’ Report on Governance and Development 2008–09. New Delhi: Daanish Books
Norton, P. (ed.). 1996. The Conservative Party Michigan: Prentice Hall.
Pai, S. and Kumar, A. 2014. The Indian Parliament: A Critical Appraisal. India, Hyderabad: Orient BlackSwan.
Parliament of the Republic of South Africa. Annotated Digest of Rulings 1994–1999. Cape Town: The Government Printer.
Rajya Sabha. 2010. Proceedings of Debates, 8 and 9 March 2010, copy of audiovisual recording obtained from Rajya Sabha Secretariat, August 2010.
Schrire, R. 2001. “The Realities of Opposition in South Africa: Legitimacy, Strategies and Consequences’, in R. Southall (ed.) Opposition and Democracy in South Africa. London: F.Cass: 25–52.
Searing, D. 1994. Westminster’s World: Understanding Political Roles. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Shankar, B.L. and Rodrigues, V. 2011. The Indian Parliament: A Democracy at Work. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Spary, C. 2010. ‘Disrupting Rituals of Debate in the Indian Parliament’, Journal of Legisla tiveS tudies, 16 (3): 33 8–3 51.
Spary, C. 2013. ‘Legislative Protest as Disruptive Democratic Practice’, Democratization, 20(3): 392–416.
Spary, C. and Garimella, R. 2013. ‘Managing Disruptions in the Indian Parliament: Interview with Mr Ravindra Garimella, Lok Sabha Secretariat, Parliament of India’, Democratization, 20(3): 539–552.
Thelen, K. 1999. ‘Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Polities’. Annual Review of Political Science, 2: 369–404.
Verma, R. and Tripathi, V. 2013. ‘Making Sense of the House: Explaining the Decline of the Indian Parliament Amidst Democratization’, Studies in Indian Politics, 1(3): 153–177.
Wolfe, E. 2004. ‘Creating Democracy’s Good Losers: The Rise, Fall and Return of Parliamentary Disorder in Post-war Japan’, Government and Opposition, 39(1): 55–79.
Wright, T. 2003. British Politics: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Young, I.M. 2002. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Carole Spary, Faith Armitage and Rachel E. Johnson
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Spary, C., Armitage, F., Johnson, R.E. (2014). Disrupting Deliberation? Comparing Repertoires of Parliamentary Representation in India, the UK and South Africa. In: Rai, S.M., Johnson, R.E. (eds) Democracy in Practice. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137361912_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137361912_9
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-47244-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-36191-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political Science CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)