The Unofficial TSR Libertarian Party

Announcements Posted on
How helpful is our apprenticeship zone? Have your say with our short survey 02-12-2016
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    To be fair I think only labour would be allowed to format with the current rules

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TitanCream)
    In terms of membership its not easy when half of the people probably lost interest because the former leader disappeared, I'm doing my best to get this off the ground and I don't understand why you cannot just give us one opportunity. I keep seeing comparisons to the Nat Libs but that was nothing to do with me and judging us by another's failure is unfair. By denying us this chance you are denying us a voice and stripping the house of an alternative view. Theres not much I can do with simply a *movement*, people aren't going to spend hours or even minutes here debating why they should have X or Y for a movement that has no spine to support itself. Joining other parties isn't the best idea because that just defeats the entire purpose of having a new voice in the house.

    If you choose to refuse party status, then fair enough but I know that without a party status then we stand practically no chance. People know who Labour and the Tories are, its easy because IRL they are the dominant parties but a libertarian party? It may be lost in the Lib Dems but people aren't going to come here looking for a libertarian movement, they want an actual party.
    You do have a platform... it's called debating in Bills when they're posted, and stand as an indie.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TitanCream)
    Update : We are ready to be involved, could we please have our status upgraded to that of party? Despite your reservations o hope that everyone will remember how active I was as Liberal MP and will excuse my slight absence as of late simply due to preparing for university. I also hope that others such as @PetrosAC @Quamquam123 @RayApparently can vouche my reliability. If not then they are no longer friends xD
    No – you need to find 10 active members, a decent number of whom have at least a little bit of MHoC experience (writing petitions, debating etc.).
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    No – you need to find 10 active members, a decent number of whom have at least a little bit of MHoC experience (writing petitions, debating etc.).
    So you need a lot more to form than some active parties actually have at the moment.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    So you need a lot more to form than some active parties actually have at the moment.
    Yes – with the assumption that some of that activity will drop off within a month or two but they will remain a properly functioning party.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    So you need a lot more to form than some active parties actually have at the moment.
    I already said that. Right now if we were all trying to form it's likely only labour would be allowed and even then that's doubtful.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    So you need a lot more to form than some active parties actually have at the moment.
    If you're referring to the Socs, they're a well established party and have been pumping out the legislation this term. We don't want another Nat Libs on our hands, the Libertarians in their dying days had gone down to one member and I never saw them release a piece of legislation but their legacy was what kept them going right til the end. There is no way TC should be allowed to start up a new party with just one other member, it's a ludicrous idea and would probably **** all over the Libertarians name.

    Back from whence you came.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    So you need a lot more to form than some active parties actually have at the moment.
    But those parties managed it once, thus proving they have the potential to be sufficiently active. The lowest level of activity in the MHoC should not be the threshold for a new party forming.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The Nat Libs wrote a Bill (seconding it with a primary sponsor) before becoming a party. Start there, maybe do a bit of the old #QQCanvass in D&CA, and I think you can get there.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    But those parties managed it once, thus proving they have the potential to be sufficiently active. The lowest level of activity in the MHoC should not be the threshold for a new party forming.
    Hear hear!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    We did write a bill, although I admit it was too ambitious and very messy.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TitanCream)
    We did write a bill, although I admit it was too ambitious and very messy.
    Probably best not to mention it then.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Probably best not too mention it then.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Honesty goes a long way.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    But those parties managed it once, thus proving they have the potential to be sufficiently active. The lowest level of activity in the MHoC should not be the threshold for a new party forming.
    Actually iirc none of the current parties had to fulfill the requirements we currently have.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TitanCream)
    Honesty goes a long way.
    Probably not when it comes to politics.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Actually iirc none of the current parties had to fulfill the requirements we currently have.
    Really? Fair enough. Though I expect that at the point when they formed the Greens at least would have met the current requirements. They've led governments after all.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Really? Fair enough. Though I expect that at the point when they formed the Greens at least would have met the current requirements. They've led governments after all.
    And shall lead governments again at some point too.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    And shall lead governments again at some point too.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    ... k
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Really? Fair enough. Though I expect that at the point when they formed the Greens at least would have met the current requirements. They've led governments after all.
    The greens only needed 5 members to form, although they were all active members of the house. Even when we led government back in XX Greens only had 8 active members at one time for about 2 months.

    All the parties before didn't have a requirement to meet but most probably met it once.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Yes – with the assumption that some of that activity will drop off within a month or two but they will remain a properly functioning party.
    I don't know how many members the greens have in their user group but active it is definitely below 10 and the one who are can't be bothered to vote and have lost multiple seats this term due to it.

    (Original post by JoeL1994)
    If you're referring to the Socs, they're a well established party and have been pumping out the legislation this term. We don't want another Nat Libs on our hands, the Libertarians in their dying days had gone down to one member and I never saw them release a piece of legislation but their legacy was what kept them going right til the end. There is no way TC should be allowed to start up a new party with just one other member, it's a ludicrous idea and would probably **** all over the Libertarians name.

    Back from whence you came.
    I'm talking about the greens, the libertarians have already released one piece of legislation.

    The socs have wrote lots of legislation even though it has been rediculous legislation, the one thing I don't doubt about them is activity.

    (Original post by RayApparently)
    But those parties managed it once, thus proving they have the potential to be sufficiently active. The lowest level of activity in the MHoC should not be the threshold for a new party forming.
    So the past is what matters not the future, why does something that happened years ago effect the party today when it is clear that the people who made the party 'sufficiently active' have left and that is why they are not as active today
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: October 23, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Today on TSR
Poll
Would you rather have...?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.