Turn on thread page Beta

Speaker’s Statement: Clarification of Post-VONC Proceedings watch

    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    On this occasion, I will postpone any general election as already outlined in my statement.

    Section 3.2 of the Constitution allows me to postpone an election as follows:


    Any election will be postponed for the reasons in the OP, and will be planned to avoid a clash with the referendum.
    So you'd postpone it for 30 days?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Birchington)
    On this occasion, I will postpone any general election as already outlined in my statement.
    Section 3.2 of the Constitution allows me to postpone an election as follows:
    Any election will be postponed for the reasons in the OP, and will be planned to avoid a clash with the referendum.
    That constitutional passage is a real question of interpretation there, I certainly wouldn't want to be the one that has to make that ruling, as I read the postponement as only applying to the case where 6 months have passed.

    On a different note, I thought we'd amended the Constitution to remove the election after a VoNC bit which clashed with another section of the Constitution.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Well, while I prefer this course of action to the previous one, I can't say that I agree. Perhaps a consultation with the rest of the House prior to this ruling would have been better.

    The first Government was brought down by the Liberals pulling out, not the incompetence of Labour. Much of the support for the VoNC was due to the fact that a minority government with 15 seats was deemed unjustified and indeed unworkable at the time (which might have been a mistake because I'm sure it would have been better than the current one).

    The second Government has been a tragicomedy from the start so there's no wonder that it's being put down. The problem, however, is with this very particular arrangement.

    Contrary to what is suggested in the statement, CON and CON/SOC are not the only justifiable options. Only the future can reveal what's possible and what isn't but it will definitely not happen if we aren't given the chance. Halfway through the term, I don't see why not, and having had two failed governments isn't a good-enough reason (at least for me). There will be no questions over the legitimacy if we factor in the whole extent of the events leading to each of the votes of no confidence rather than the acts themselves.

    As to whether something would be a source of instability and disputes, a) one should see rather than speculate and b) what will three months matter if the members remain the same?

    Birchington, if you have the events of the 9th Parliament that you referred us to at hand, could you please elaborate or provide a link to the ruling? Thanks.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Burford99)
    So you'd postpone it for 30 days?
    On this occasion, the election will be postponed until this Parliament expires.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    On this occasion, the election will be postponed until this Parliament expires.
    But that goes against the Constitution, so you don't actually have the power to do that surely?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Burford99)
    But that goes against the Constitution, so you don't actually have the power to do that surely?
    Second coup in a week
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Burford99)
    But that goes against the Constitution, so you don't actually have the power to do that surely?
    There is precedent for it (9th parliament) so this is perfectly lawful.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Second coup in a week
    #AphForSpeaker
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    So, you're going to overrule the Constitution? Or am I missing the part where, as Speaker, you can do as you please and be subject to no guidelines? Or am I missing the part where the Constitution allows you to do this?
    I feel this outcome would benefit the House. The alternative would be to postpone the election until after the referendum vote concludes (which would likely extend just over 30 days depending on when the poll opens). I respect the Constitution and abide by it - however, given the events of recent weeks, the House needs a period without VONCs or elections to regain some stability.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Republic1)
    There is precedent for it (9th parliament) so this is perfectly lawful.
    Wrong. Statute (or written law, in this case) takes precedence over case law (or the precedent set about 5 or 6 years ago) in English judicial cases.

    So it isn't lawful.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    I feel this outcome would benefit the House. The alternative would be to postpone the election until after the referendum vote concludes (which would likely extend just over 30 days depending on when the poll opens). I respect the Constitution and abide by it - however, given the events of recent weeks, the House needs a period without VONCs or elections to regain some stability.
    But you don't actually have the right to do it.

    Is this against the Constitution or not Mr Speaker?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Burford99)
    Wrong. Statute (or written law, in this case) takes precedence over case law (or the precedent set about 5 or 6 years ago) in English judicial cases.

    So it isn't lawful.
    We're not talking RL law here. We're talking about power that the Speaker has, which has always run on precedent in this House. The speaker must take in to account rulings of previous speakers and act accordingly.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Burford99)
    #AphForSpeaker
    Nah, straight to dictator
    #Aph4:fuhrer:
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Republic1)
    We're not talking RL law here. We're talking about power that the Speaker has, which has always run on precedent in this House. The speaker must take in to account rulings of previous speakers and act accordingly.
    But my point is that codified law still takes precedence in any system.

    If an amendment was made to the Constitution over that time, then the Speaker would have to follow that, and not previous events.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Burford99)
    But my point is thatcodified law still takes precedence in any system.

    If an amendment was made to the Constitution over that time, then the Speaker would have to follow that, and not previous events.
    Birch is perfectly within his rights to do this. Speakers have always decreed things like this based on precedent. Any of the old timers will tell you that, whether you agree with it or not
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Republic1)
    Birch is perfectly within his rights to do this. Speakers have always decreed things like this based on precedent. Any of the old timers will tell you that, whether you agree with it or not
    But he isn't. Again, I repeat, the constitution takes precedence over precedent. Otherwise what is the point of a constitution?
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Burford99)
    But you don't actually have the right to do it.

    Is this against the Constitution or not Mr Speaker?
    Whilst I would like to postpone the election until November, my wording refers to an 'immediate' general election.

    " I now feel that holding an immediate general election would not be appropriate at this time."

    A compromise will be to hold the election after the conclusion of the referendum.

    B789 mandates the Speaker to co-ordinate the referendum as follows:

    1. Campaign groups will be created 21 days before the date the vote opens.
    2. The day appointed under subsection (2) must be no sooner than 28 September 2015 and no later than 8 October 2015. (date of poll opening).

    Therefore, I propose the following timeframe for the referendum which will then decide the election dates:

    Campaign groups open on 7th September.
    +21 days = 28th September, when polling will open.
    Poll open for 7 days = 5th October.

    The election can then be held after the 5th October.

    This hopefully reaches a sensible and agreeable compromise, which prevents an "immediate election", comes closer to the actual date of the conclusion of the Parliament, ensures B789 proceeds as normal and provides a legitimate reason to proceed differently to the Constitution.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I do feel that it might be preferable to in future hold some consultation with the house when there are concerns rather than unilaterally making and indeed reversing decisions. The constitution is rather clear on what should happen and any diversion from this should be by consensus, and certainly not done without the consent of whoever the constitutionally legitimate government would be should the VoNC be successful.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Birchington)
    Whilst I would like to postpone the election until November, my wording refers to an 'immediate' general election.

    " I now feel that holding an immediate general election would not be appropriate at this time."

    A compromise will be to hold the election after the conclusion of the referendum.

    B789 mandates the Speaker to co-ordinate the referendum as follows:

    1. Campaign groups will be created 21 days before the date the vote opens.
    2. The day appointed under subsection (2) must be no sooner than 28 September 2015 and no later than 8 October 2015. (date of poll opening).

    Therefore, I propose the following timeframe for the referendum which will then decide the election dates:

    Campaign groups open on 7th September.
    +21 days = 28th September, when polling will open.
    Poll open for 7 days = 5th October.

    The election can then be held after the 5th October.

    This hopefully reaches a sensible and agreeable compromise.
    While that is still in breach of the Constitution, it isn't actually that bad, especially if we work on basis of an imaginary negotiation, followed by an imaginary PM calling a GE and then you holding it off the 30 days, haven't looked at exactly where that would come out but it would only be a few days out if at all.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Regarding the constitution.

    The very first line:

    1.1.1.overseeing the house as a forum assistant and ruling where the Constitution does not specify a course of action
    Now in this case the constitution contradicts itself regarding a VoNC.

    Since in 3.2 it says an election can be held if "if a vote of no confidence in the Government passes".

    However, we know this not to be true since a successful VoNC leads to Coalition negotiations. This is stated in 10.3 of the Constitution and also mentioned in the GD.

    Add to this the fact that we've had every party but two in government this term, and most people don't seem too keen for more negotiations then we have the wonderfully British tradition of a constitutional crisis.

    It is clear that the Constitution is not clear (hehe) so then 1.1.1 takes over and the Speaker may specify a course of action.

    Now precedent kicks in and Birch follows the decision of former Speaker daniel_williams to annul the government.

    Simple.
 
 
 
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: August 27, 2015
Poll
Who do you think it's more helpful to talk about mental health with?

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.