Turn on thread page Beta

Speaker’s Statement: TSR Centre Party watch

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xXedixXx)
    That's my opinion.
    It is implied to be fact by context.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ocassus)
    It is implied to be fact by context.
    In that case I'm deeply sorry that you feel confused. I didn't mean to imply that.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    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.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    What are you going to do now?
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by xXedixXx)
    What are you going to do now?
    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.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Day'um!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Seconded.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Haha, i called the by-election first.

    But yes, it can only be good for the house.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    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.

    (Original post by toronto353)
    Rakas I like that idea, but we would need to create an amendment for that to happen.
    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 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.
    :yy: I agree completely with this.

    (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.
    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
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Could we motion for you to do this, rather than the hastle of an amendment?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OrangeStu)
    Could we motion for you to do this, rather than the hastle of an amendment?
    Hmm, I'm not sure that a motion would provide as much of an opportunity to discuss the process of a by-election.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    (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?
    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?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (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?
    I see what you mean, and I agree
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    QFA
    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.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Shame to see any party go.
    I would definitely support the idea for a by-election if for nothing else than to hopefully get a bit mor einterest in the MHoC
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Thanks, and I think it should be advertised across TSR to encourage people to come forward.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
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.

Updated: December 13, 2011
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university

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.