This chapter summarises the main findings of the book and indicates future directions for research. The analyses of floor apportionment showed that while gender is salient in the House of Commons, many other factors (such as seniority) also affect the uptake of speaking turns. Adversarial language was used by all groups of politicians to some extent, and it appears to be a common convention of political discourse. The benefits of adversarial language, such as the function of scrutiny, are underlined and ways of categorising more destructive types of adversarial language suggested. The ethnographic descriptions of the devolved institutions leads to suggestions about what makes a political institutions more egalitarian, including an equal distribution of minority groups in all political parties, and informality and flexibility of proceedings. With respect to linguistic analyses, the intertextual mechanisms by which homosocial bonds are formed seems a fruitful area for further research. Finally, the case studies point to sexist attitudes and representations of women politicians, coupled with increasing critical awareness and intolerance of such representations which may improve the conditions of participation for women in politics.