Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Rakas' TSR Motion and Bill Challenge proves how terrible this term has been with a government not doing much, other parties overtaking the government, and an overall fall in activity. In both Parliaments it shows UKIP has been carrying the MHoC forward, a role we aim to continue next Parliament.

    22nd Parliament
    22nd Parliament to date..

    Ukip: 20
    Government: 19
    Green: 18
    Conservative: 13
    Socialist: 8
    Liberal: 3


    20th Parliament
    20th Parliament

    Ukip: 53
    Green: 16
    Government: 16
    Conservative: 10
    Labour: 8
    Socialist: 1
    No, it shows that UKIP have submitted the most. But quantity does not infer quality. If the government wanted it could have made lots of peicemeal stuff and won but we care about the big issues
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Rakas' TSR Motion and Bill Challenge proves how terrible this term has been with a government not doing much, other parties overtaking the government, and an overall fall in activity. In both Parliaments it shows UKIP has been carrying the MHoC forward, a role we aim to continue next Parliament.

    22nd Parliament
    22nd Parliament to date..

    Ukip: 20
    Government: 19
    Green: 18
    Conservative: 13
    Socialist: 8
    Liberal: 3


    20th Parliament
    20th Parliament

    Ukip: 53
    Green: 16
    Government: 16
    Conservative: 10
    Labour: 8
    Socialist: 1
    I wonder what the figures for Bills passed in this Parliament is.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    No, it shows that UKIP have submitted the most. But quantity does not infer quality. If the government wanted it could have made lots of peicemeal stuff and won but we care about the big issues
    Even when we look at quality not quantity the government is still put to shame.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    No, it shows that UKIP have submitted the most. But quantity does not infer quality. If the government wanted it could have made lots of peicemeal stuff and won but we care about the big issues
    In the 20th Parliament I believe UKIP had a strong success rate with bills passing, or narrowly losing, however, if UKIP's 53 points are removed from the total, the shortage in items would have seen the MHoC nearly collapse in the 20th Parliament.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    In both Parliaments it shows UKIP has been carrying the MHoC forward, a role we aim to continue next Parliament.
    By carrying the MHOC forward I presume you mean back to the 1950s when casual racism was excepted and angry white men where openly sexist, racist and homophobic?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    By carrying the MHOC forward I presume you mean back to the 1950s when casual racism was excepted and angry white men where openly sexist, racist and homophobic?
    It appears it was UKIP's efforts in the twentieth Parliament that means there is still an MHoC because in the twentieth Parliament UKIP produced 51% of all items debated in the MHoC.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    By carrying the MHOC forward I presume you mean back to the 1950s when casual racism was excepted and angry white men where openly sexist, racist and homophobic?
    Back to a better time, not quite as good as 1921 though.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    It appears it was UKIP's efforts in the twentieth Parliament that means there is still an MHoC because in the twentieth Parliament UKIP produced 51% of all items debated in the MHoC.
    And now extract head from backside.

    There would still be an MHoC without UKIP, you know.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    In the 20th Parliament I believe UKIP had a strong success rate with bills passing, or narrowly losing, however, if UKIP's 53 points are removed from the total, the shortage in items would have seen the MHoC nearly collapse in the 20th Parliament.
    The issues with the success rate is that it doesn't include withdrawn bills. Like although this term you have submitted 20 items about half were withdrawn and most have been defeated so I would argue that shows poor quality in your items.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    The issues with the success rate is that it doesn't include withdrawn bills. Like although this term you have submitted 20 items about half were withdrawn and most have been defeated so I would argue that shows poor quality in your items.
    It doesn't necessarily show poor quality, I could submit some very old pieces of RL legislation, making a couple of changes as necessary due to new laws and the likes, and nobody would deny high quality, but if I chose a piece that special snowflakes couldn't handle it would be crushed. Passage is not a seal of quality, and nor is failure proof of a lack thereof.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    Not all RL legeslation is of high quality though. And I would say that a failed bill either signifies poor quality or a stupid idea.Well it should be how many submitted items ultimately pass.And that ignores any possible reaction to less action in the house to counter the effects of dwindling numbers.
    Passed items do not represent quality, the Alternative Tax Act had fundamental flaws but the left-wing MPs voted for it, the Living Wage Bill gives control of the minimum wage to a powerful think tank, and the Transgender Equality Bill gives couples unlimited financial compensation for being in a relationship before recognition of transgender individuals, and other bills cost more than is saved because contractual agreements are broke; all of those bills have serious flaws but all passed.

    Saracen's Fez That is true but if the twentieth Parliament did not have UKIP in there would have been a 51% fall in items; members would have weakened the MHoC by quitting.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    It doesn't necessarily show poor quality, I could submit some very old pieces of RL legislation, making a couple of changes as necessary due to new laws and the likes, and nobody would deny high quality, but if I chose a piece that special snowflakes couldn't handle it would be crushed. Passage is not a seal of quality, and nor is failure proof of a lack thereof.
    Not all RL legeslation is of high quality though. And I would say that a failed bill either signifies poor quality or a stupid idea.
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Success rate is measured by how many bill pass in the Division Lobby, or nearly pass in the Division Lobby; withdrawn items is a different measure.

    Saracen's Fez That is true but if the twentieth Parliament did not have UKIP in there would have been a 51% fall in items; members would have quit weakening the MHoC.
    Well it should be how many submitted items ultimately pass.

    And that ignores any possible reaction to less action in the house to counter the effects of dwindling numbers.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    It appears it was UKIP's efforts in the twentieth Parliament that means there is still an MHoC because in the twentieth Parliament UKIP produced 51% of all items debated in the MHoC.
    I think my honourable friend answered this quite well, but I would add I doubt one slow parliament would have killed of the MHoC.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Back to a better time, not quite as good as 1921 though.
    I thought you lot called it the 1922 committee or something. Anyway I would say given 1921 falls before 1945 then it is hardly a better time, our greatest Prime Minister hadn't even reached office by then.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    It doesn't necessarily show poor quality, I could submit some very old pieces of RL legislation, making a couple of changes as necessary due to new laws and the likes, and nobody would deny high quality, but if I chose a piece that special snowflakes couldn't handle it would be crushed. Passage is not a seal of quality, and nor is failure proof of a lack thereof.
    Quality may be great, but it is the contents that matter, so no it doesn't per say show bad quality, just bad content.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    Not all RL legeslation is of high quality though. And I would say that a failed bill either signifies poor quality or a stupid idea.

    Well it should be how many submitted items ultimately pass.

    And that ignores any possible reaction to less action in the house to counter the effects of dwindling numbers.
    And yet good ideas fall by the wayside and stupid ideas get passed

    Which do you think your amendment was, a stupid idea or poor quality?

    Was the ATA a good idea and high quality, after all it only just passed and then got crushed later on?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I think my honourable friend answered this quite well, but I would add I doubt one slow parliament would have killed of the MHoC.


    I thought you lot called it the 1922 committee or something. Anyway I would say given 1921 falls before 1945 then it is hardly a better time, our greatest Prime Minister hadn't even reached office by then.



    Quality may be great, but it is the contents that matter, so no it doesn't per say show bad quality, just bad content.
    The 1922 committee has nothing to do with 1921, took it's name from the 1922 election, and was formed in 1923.

    And I wouldn't call the man that shelled off the empire the greatest PM, it would take rather severe incompetence to get much lower.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    And yet good ideas fall by the wayside and stupid ideas get passed

    Which do you think your amendment was, a stupid idea or poor quality?

    Was the ATA a good idea and high quality, after all it only just passed and then got crushed later on?
    We likely disagree on what a stupid idea is.

    Probably poor quality, trying to do too much too fast.

    It was an good idea with poor implementation.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    We likely disagree on what a stupid idea is.

    Probably poor quality, trying to do too much too fast.

    It was an good idea with poor implementation.
    Good to see you support pricing people out of London.

    What about a piece that is rejected in one parliament and the exact same implemented in the next? Clearly it's a bad idea or poor quality, but it is also clearly neither.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    The 1922 committee has nothing to do with 1921, took it's name from the 1922 election, and was formed in 1923.

    And I wouldn't call the man that shelled off the empire the greatest PM, it would take rather severe incompetence to get much lower.
    Fair enough, I thought your 1921 point was in reference to that committee, my mistake.

    As for your second point, I wouldn't call it shelling off the empire, I would call it granting freedom and liberty and trying to right the wrongs of colonialism
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Good to see you support pricing people out of London.

    What about a piece that is rejected in one parliament and the exact same implemented in the next? Clearly it's a bad idea or poor quality, but it is also clearly neither.
    You are making a logical phallacy here. Just because an item failing suggests that it is a bad idea or poor quality doesn't mean that an item passing suggests the converse is true.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    You are making a logical phallacy here. Just because an item failing suggests that it is a bad idea or poor quality doesn't mean that an item passing suggests the converse is true.
    Then clearly saying "we should look at items that passed" is irrelevant too, if a party puts forwards a million good quality bills that are good ideas that are rejected and passes noen, then surely that is the better party than the one that passes a million but none are good quality and all are stupid.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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