This thesis explores the existence and expression of gender bias in the UK Parliament, focusing on the communicative behaviour from the Members of Parliament (MP) towards the Prime Minister (PM) during Prime Minister Questions (PMQ). The analysis compared the attitude towards female vs. male PMs to identify patterns of gender bias showing in interaction and investigate the influence of gender in leadership on parliamentary discourse. Public and media opinions of female political leaders have been the subject of extensive research, but inside the parliamentary discourse and the means in which gender stereotypes affect MPs communication practices towards male and female PMs has received less attention. Using a mixed-method approach based on the theoretical framework of Role Congruity Theory and Double Bind Theory, this study examines both qualitative and quantitative elements of parliamentary interactions, including communication styles, interruptions, and ways of addressing. Ingrained institutional norms and social preconceptions are reflected in the findings, which show minor but noteworthy gendered variations in MPs’ interactions with PMs. This research highlights the widespread impact of gender bias and discourse by concentrating on parliamentary debates, thereby addressing the crucial gap regarding the gender dynamics inside legislative settings. In conclusion, the study emphasises the importance of recognising and addressing of institutional patterns to advance inclusive political participation on gender equality.