Timeline for Is there a hierarchy in how you refer to a UK MP? If so could you use a lower ranked one as an insult?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 13, 2021 at 7:49 | history | edited | CDJB♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 60 characters in body
|
| Oct 12, 2021 at 19:01 | comment | added | hobbs | @eggyal yes, there is a hierarchy, yes, there are rules, yes, you can flout those rules for effect. Since that's the substance of the question, it seems to warrant the leading "yes". The rest shows that it doesn't seem to be done with intent terribly often, and it isn't left to stand uncorrected. | |
| Oct 11, 2021 at 16:13 | comment | added | eggyal | Your answer begins "yes", but virtually everything that follows suggests "no"? You identify that the only admonishments that actually get made are when one uses an individual's name rather than their position, and the quotes from Erskine May and the Information Office suggest the intention there is more to depersonalise debate than to avoid insult. As for the choice to refer to a member by their constituency rather than their ministerial post, could that not be explained by the subject matter under debate being more pertinent to that particular role? | |
| Oct 11, 2021 at 9:49 | vote | accept | Matt Bartlett | ||
| Oct 11, 2021 at 8:29 | history | answered | CDJB♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |