Post 1 - Infotainment on Whips in the Grandmother of Westminster models
From Wikipedia (underlinings are mine):
In the UK Parliament the importance of a vote is indicated by underlining of items on the "whip", which is the name of the letter the Chief Whip sends to all the MPs in their party at the start of the week. This letter informs them of the schedule for the days ahead, and includes the sentence, "Your attendance is absolutely essential" next to each debate in which there will be a vote. This sentence is underlined one, two or three times depending on the consequences that will be suffered if they do not turn up, hence the origin of the terms one-line whip, two-line whip and three-line whip. The actual direction of their vote is communicated to them in the chamber by hand signals during the division when the time comes (usually after the division bell has been rung). Even though it determines the outcome of the votes crucially far more than the debate,
neither these instructions, which are visible to everyone in the chamber, nor the "whip" letter at the start of the week, are recorded in Hansard, as they are considered an internal matter of the political party; indeed, the system exists because any explicit direction to an MP as to how they should vote would technically be a Breach of Parliamentary Privilege.
The consequences for defying the party whip depend on the circumstances and are usually negotiated with the party whip in advance. The party whip's job is to ensure the outcome of the vote, so the situation is different and more important for a party which holds the majority, because if their members obey the whip they can always win. They can make allowances for MPs who are away on important business, whose political circumstances require them to take a particular single issue very seriously, or if there is a mass revolt. Theoretically at least, expulsion from the party is automatically consequent from defying a three-line whip.
An example of this is in the case of John Major’s government. Nine conservative Members of Parliament had their whips removed after voting against the government on its stance to the Maastricht Treaty. It was also the only time when MPs who are being whipped were co-operating with the opposite side's whips.
There are some cases in which whips are removed because an issue is a matter of conscience. These include adoption, religion and equal opportunities.
The impact of a whip being imposed on a matter of conscience can be damaging for a party leader. One such case was that of Iain Duncan-Smith, who imposed a three-line whip against adoption of children by gay couples.
Several Conservative MPs voted against the official party line, and Duncan-Smith's authority was weakened.
Whips can often be brutal to backbenchers to secure their vote, and will resort to a mixture of promises, threats, blackmail and extortion to force an unpopular vote. A good whip will know secrets and incriminating information about Members of Parliament. A whip should know major figures in an MP's local constituency party and the MP's agent. There have been cases where Members of Parliament were wheeled from far afield to vote for the government on a crucial vote.
………….
For a minister, the consequences for defying the party whip are absolute: they are dismissed from their job immediately, if they have not already resigned, and return to being a backbencher. Sometimes their votes in Parliament are called the "payroll vote", because they can be taken for granted.
The consequences for a back-bencher can include the lack of future promotion to a government post, a reduction of party campaigning effort in his or her constituency during the next election, deselection by his or her local party activists, or, in extreme circumstances, "withdrawal of the whip" and expulsion from the party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Whip#United_Kingdom
