Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre Party
TSR's model parliament.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
| TSR launches Learn Together! - Our new subscription to help improve your learning | 16-05-2013 | |
-
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyIt is implied to be fact by context.(Original post by xXedixXx)
That's my opinion. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyIn that case I'm deeply sorry that you feel confused. I didn't mean to imply that.(Original post by Ocassus)
It is implied to be fact by context. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre Party
The new Leaders of the Party were excellent in my opinion, and successfully produced a manifesto to stand in the election, but sadly it takes more than just a leader or two to make a party. This has been at the back of my mind for a long time... sad to see it happen like this - never even knew that there was such a section in the constitution - but not totally unexpected.
-
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyWhat are you going to do now?(Original post by Smack)
The new Leaders of the Party were excellent in my opinion, and successfully produced a manifesto to stand in the election, but sadly it takes more than just a leader or two to make a party. This has been at the back of my mind for a long time... sad to see it happen like this - never even knew that there was such a section in the constitution - but not totally unexpected. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyWell I haven't done much in the MHoC this entire year, so today's events do not change much for me. I'll continue what I've been doing, i.e. focusing on real life.(Original post by xXedixXx)
What are you going to do now? -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyDay'um!(Original post by Smack)
Well I haven't done much in the MHoC this entire year, so today's events do not change much for me. I'll continue what I've been doing, i.e. focusing on real life. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre Party
It's a shame to see a party go.
I would like to see a by-election for those seats because:
1) I don't like the idea of this MP seats just being voided, it would seem like a waste.
2) It would give a chance for other people to become MP's, ones who haven't yet had a chance.
3) It would be something different for the house and it might help activity.
That's my opinion.
Anyway I hope the members if the former centre party stick around the MHoC, whether it means joining another party or going solo. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartySeconded.(Original post by thunder_chunky)
It's a shame to see a party go.
I would like to see a by-election for those seats because:
1) I don't like the idea of this MP seats just being voided, it would seem like a waste.
2) It would give a chance for other people to become MP's, ones who haven't yet had a chance.
3) It would be something different for the house and it might help activity.
That's my opinion.
Anyway I hope the members if the former centre party stick around the MHoC, whether it means joining another party or going solo. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre Party
This is sad, but not unexpected. In fact it's especially sad as the party was founded due to the Lib Dems becoming a bit left and joining a grand left coalition, leaving a chasm in the middle, and looking at the current government's bills this seems to be happening again. However I noticed before I left it had become a lot less active, so I could see it going this way.
We wouldn't. The precedent has always been that everything the constitution doesn't state explicitly is for the Speaker to decide. The constitution is there to constrain the Speaker in the specific areas it mentions, and the guiding document is there to guide the Speaker in some other areas on what's commonly considered right in most cases, but on everything else they have free reign.(Original post by toronto353)
Rakas I like that idea, but we would need to create an amendment for that to happen.
(Original post by thunder_chunky)
It's a shame to see a party go.
I would like to see a by-election for those seats because:
1) I don't like the idea of this MP seats just being voided, it would seem like a waste.
2) It would give a chance for other people to become MP's, ones who haven't yet had a chance.
3) It would be something different for the house and it might help activity.
That's my opinion.
Anyway I hope the members if the former centre party stick around the MHoC, whether it means joining another party or going solo.
I agree completely with this.
Join the MRLP? We're pretty laid back and a good place for members of all persuasions who've lost the will to be active in serious bills and debates to go(Original post by Smack)
Well I haven't done much in the MHoC this entire year, so today's events do not change much for me. I'll continue what I've been doing, i.e. focusing on real life.
-
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyYou're quite right theoretically, but I've decided to do nothing with those seats, so an amendment would be required in this instance. I have no strong opinion either way, so if the House decides it wants a by-election, it has the power to make the changes to enable this. It's adding something to the game that hasn't been done before and there are some important considerations (such as the possibility (theoretically in the future) of having a party with more seats than the government or opposition) and so I think it should be discussed and approved by the whole House.(Original post by Drogue)
We wouldn't. The precedent has always been that everything the constitution doesn't state explicitly is for the Speaker to decide. The constitution is there to constrain the Speaker in the specific areas it mentions, and the guiding document is there to guide the Speaker in some other areas on what's commonly considered right in most cases, but on everything else they have free reign.Last edited by Metrobeans; 04-12-2011 at 01:28. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyCould we motion for you to do this, rather than the hastle of an amendment?(Original post by Metrobeans)
You're quite right theoretically, but I've decided to do nothing with those seats, so an amendment would be required in this instance. I have no strong opinion either way, so if the House decides it wants a by-election, it has the power to make the changes to enable this. It's adding something to the game that hasn't been done before and there are some important considerations (such as the possibility (theoretically in the future) of having a party with more seats than the government or opposition) and so I think it should be discussed and approved by the whole House. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre Party
I am surprised that there has never been a by-election before (i recall that there was a Green Party at one point).
I think if an opposition party ever had more seats than the government then it would probably have to have a vote of no confidence and force an election since we can't really have every bill being shot down. -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyHmm, I'm not sure that a motion would provide as much of an opportunity to discuss the process of a by-election.(Original post by OrangeStu)
Could we motion for you to do this, rather than the hastle of an amendment? -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyBut a motion wouldn't actually force a by-election if passed would it? Either a bill or an amendment would.(Original post by Metrobeans)
Hmm, I'm not sure that a motion would provide as much of an opportunity to discuss the process of a by-election.
And is that ultiamtely what it would take to put the wheels in motion? -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre Party(Original post by Metrobeans)
Hmm, I'm not sure that a motion would provide as much of an opportunity to discuss the process of a by-election.The motion wouldn't force the By-Election, but Nick said he wouldn't use his power as Speaker (outside the constitution) to run a By-Election without the approval of the House (by an amendment). I was hoping that if we ran a motion saying "This House supports the decision to run a By-Election to fill the three current vacant seats as the Speaker see fit" would be enough approval for Nick to run the election. No?(Original post by thunder_chunky)
But a motion wouldn't actually force a by-election if passed would it? Either a bill or an amendment would.
And is that ultiamtely what it would take to put the wheels in motion? -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyI see what you mean, and I agree(Original post by OrangeStu)
The motion wouldn't force the By-Election, but Nick said he wouldn't use his power as Speaker (outside the constitution) to run a By-Election without the approval of the House (by an amendment). I was hoping that if we ran a motion saying "This House supports the decision to run a By-Election to fill the three current vacant seats as the Speaker see fit" would be enough approval for Nick to run the election. No? -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyHave to say I liked your junior ministers idea, the one where only they can run for the seats. Would bring in some new faces and possibly help towards increased activity.(Original post by thunder_chunky)
QFA -
Re: Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre PartyThanks, and I think it should be advertised across TSR to encourage people to come forward.(Original post by Moleman1996)
Have to say I liked your junior ministers idea, the one where only they can run for the seats. Would bring in some new faces and possibly help towards increased activity.