Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Aye. Lets stop make it harder for the voting robots, and make them at least read the bill.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by McRite)
    Aye. Lets stop make it harder for the voting robots, and make them at least read the bill.
    Or just look at how their party members voted?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    I'd like to think that that isn't the case. A bill shouldn't be up to the author to defend but everyone who supports it, the same for amendments where at least (one would hope) seconders would defend too.

    The main issue is that there is a very real issue in the house that a persons name associated with an item can carry more weight in a persons voting decision than the contents itself. That isn't right.
    When something is a party bill it will have the party defend it, a pmb tends to only happen if the party has rejected the bill do already lacks support. Chances are there won't be many people regardless coming out to defend it if anyone, I just don't see this working.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    When something is a party bill it will have the party defend it, a pmb tends to only happen if the party has rejected the bill do already lacks support. Chances are there won't be many people regardless coming out to defend it if anyone, I just don't see this working.
    PMB doesn't nessesaraly mean party rejection.

    The only credible argument is that you don't know who to direct comments to to try and get changes in later readings. But a good author reads thought the thread and picks up on everything. People seem to be making an accountability argument which is poor because the moment this stops going thought the house the name is revealed so it's not like they are always anonymous.

    I considered a first reading is no debating just an opening statement from interested parties about the bill and what they think should happen and at the end the proposer only is revealed in the first reading and not anywhere else. But I think that then doesn't fix the issue I want to solve which is a name prejudicing an item. Which I take it you do belive is a real issue?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    PMB doesn't nessesaraly mean party rejection.

    The only credible argument is that you don't know who to direct comments to to try and get changes in later readings. But a good author reads thought the thread and picks up on everything. People seem to be making an accountability argument which is poor because the moment this stops going thought the house the name is revealed so it's not like they are always anonymous.

    I considered a first reading is no debating just an opening statement from interested parties about the bill and what they think should happen and at the end the proposer only is revealed in the first reading and not anywhere else. But I think that then doesn't fix the issue I want to solve which is a name prejudicing an item. Which I take it you do belive is a real issue?
    I did say it tends to be due to rejection, not always because of. And I agree there is an issue with people seeing a bill is by especially you or Nigel and straight out rejecting it. However I don't think this will actually do anything to help that issue at all.

    I'm not having an issue with accountability so much as I don't think we will see people defending a bill that isn't theirs and they certainly won't be able to negotiate changes to the bill. I think it will become obvious after a brief debate who's bill it is, if it isn't from tells in the bill itself
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I did say it tends to be due to rejection, not always because of. And I agree there is an issue with people seeing a bill is by especially you or Nigel and straight out rejecting it. However I don't think this will actually do anything to help that issue at all.

    I'm not having an issue with accountability so much as I don't think we will see people defending a bill that isn't theirs and they certainly won't be able to negotiate changes to the bill. I think it will become obvious after a brief debate who's bill it is, if it isn't from tells in the bill itself
    Yes, I think there are probably other toxic names and it's not just bills but amendments which could be proposed by a different member and instantly get more support. Which isn't how it should be.

    I do see what you mean but TBH it's hard to get changes anyway and I belive there is an amendment in the pipeline to allow members to put changes to vote during the course of enacting a bill which removes that issue.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Yes, I think there are probably other toxic names and it's not just bills but amendments which could be proposed by a different member and instantly get more support. Which isn't how it should be.

    I do see what you mean but TBH it's hard to get changes anyway and I belive there is an amendment in the pipeline to allow members to put changes to vote during the course of enacting a bill which removes that issue.
    For sure, the two I mentioned were just examples. As for amendments it may be more more viable than for bills, due to the different in nature of the two, but I'm still doubtful.

    I wouldn't mind trying this out but only if a repeal would be possible if it is shown to not work
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Nah. If it was option then perhaps. I doubt this would work in practice. Someone would say 'well XYZ wrote this obviously' and then XYZ would say 'I can neither confirm nor deny...' and then it would actually be obvious.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Nah. If it was option then perhaps. I doubt this would work in practice. Someone would say 'well XYZ wrote this obviously' and then XYZ would say 'I can neither confirm nor deny...' and then it would actually be obvious.
    Some one saying 'well XYZ wrote this' would be in contradiction of this amendment so wouldn't happen.

    And it being optional wouldn't work, only people who have toxic names would use it and then anonymous things would end up as a toxic brand.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Aph)
    Some one saying 'well XYZ wrote this' would be in contradiction of this amendment so wouldn't happen.

    And it being optional wouldn't work, only people who have toxic names would use it and then anonymous things would end up as a toxic brand.
    Why would that contradict this?

    Then PMBs can no longer be used to make an ideological statement.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Probably Abstain. Doubt it'll work, don't believe there's a genuine problem that needs addressing but don't think it will be very detrimental if it passes.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Why would that contradict this?

    Then PMBs can no longer be used to make an ideological statement.
    The garunteed anonymity and not being allowed to attempt to find out who it was. It breaches at least one but I believe both is those...

    It's also amendments which IMO are a bigger issue because of how partisan amendments have become. Sometimes I've even had to consider getting one of my seconders to be primary author due to how toxic my name is on amendments.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Aph)
    The garunteed anonymity and not being allowed to attempt to find out who it was. It breaches at least one but I believe both is those...

    It's also amendments which IMO are a bigger issue because of how partisan amendments have become. Sometimes I've even had to consider getting one of my seconders to be primary author due to how toxic my name is on amendments.
    Say it's obvious who the author is doesn't display an attempt to find out who the author is. And guaranteed anonymity by who? I don't see how an individual (under the current wording) could be held as committing an 'offence'. Also, when someone argues for their PMB, I imagine it'll become farcically obvious who the author is.

    Most amendments I see are rubbish anyway - regardless of who wrote them. I don't recall ever thinking an amendment was more rubbish because you wrote it, excluding spelling errors.

    If this were to only anonymise amendments and not PMBs (I am proud to affix my name and the names of my seconders on anything I choose to produce separate from my party) then I'd switch from No/Abstain to an Aye - because what the hell.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Say it's obvious who the author is doesn't display an attempt to find out who the author is. And guaranteed anonymity by who? I don't see how an individual (under the current wording) could be held as committing an 'offence'. Also, when someone argues for their PMB, I imagine it'll become farcically obvious who the author is.

    Most amendments I see are rubbish anyway - regardless of who wrote them. I don't recall ever thinking an amendment was more rubbish because you wrote it, excluding spelling errors.

    If this were to only anonymise amendments and not PMBs (I am proud to affix my name and the names of my seconders on anything I choose to produce separate from my party) then I'd switch from No/Abstain to an Aye - because what the hell.
    I know it might become obvious later on, but by not having names at first it forces people to read it and make a decision not prejudiced by the name on the bill, amendment ect.

    Based on what you and Kay_Winters have said, if this were more of a trial to see if it works/doesn't make a difference at all with maybe a simple majority vote scheduled for 3 months after enactment to keep it (assuming that would be constitutional) would that make you more likely to aye.

    And the problem with PMB's is, if you look back through them, you will see plenty of comments speaking as if the author detracts from the idea. Which is clearly an issue.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    So what if I just go into a thread and say 'I wrote this amendment'? Also, any seconders are going to know. And if someone asked says they won't secnd it... They then know...
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    And Aph, I can quite frankly assure you I don't think this amendment is the most ridiculous thing because you wrote it. I think it's the most ridiculous thing because it's just ridiculous.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    This amendment is in cessation.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Division! Clear the lobbies!
 
 
 
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 16, 2016
  • 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 like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • 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

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