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

S08 - Statement from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Watch

    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    "I don't what the exact piece of legislation is off the top of my head, but HMT has controlled all governmental expenditure since 1664. You could not just give a large sum of money from department to another without HMT say so, I can't remember the exact figure or if there is one, but departments' expenditure has to be approved line by line by HMT. It chooses not to get involved in how much a packet of biros cost, but it could. A good real example was a Zulu invasion (can't remember where in SA) where the governor didn't get proper approval for using a horse, so Treasury made him pay for it."

    "If departments are giving each other money within the year, then something bizarre has happened unless it is part of a strange deliberate process or some sort of procurement or staffing thing (where the sums are likely not too big by government's standards). The mechanics would be 1 department would transfer money to another department though, not that HMT would give another department more cash as that would require more borrowing or taking from the reserves."
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    I have also been told that technically IRL all departmental spending goes through the CST rather than Chancellor, but regardless, treasury, and sums of billions certainly do, bar the fact that such changes would wait until the next tax year.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    "I don't what the exact piece of legislation is off the top of my head, but HMT has controlled all governmental expenditure since 1664. You could not just give a large sum of money from department to another without HMT say so, I can't remember the exact figure or if there is one, but departments' expenditure has to be approved line by line by HMT. It chooses not to get involved in how much a packet of biros cost, but it could. A good real example was a Zulu invasion (can't remember where in SA) where the governor didn't get proper approval for using a horse, so Treasury made him pay for it."

    "If departments are giving each other money within the year, then something bizarre has happened unless it is part of a strange deliberate process or some sort of procurement or staffing thing (where the sums are likely not too big by government's standards). The mechanics would be 1 department would transfer money to another department though, not that HMT would give another department more cash as that would require more borrowing or taking from the reserves."
    Quotes from some person we have not met and do not know are all well and good, but I cannot see a bill form 1664 or anytime around then which seem to suggest what you are. Present a bill or all we can do is assume that it is simply tradition which can be broken.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    Now James has left, who is the new chancellor?
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Is TSR Labour just bad at making announcements in their threads?
    This has not been officially announced yet as I am still waiting for Petros to complete his appointments before I announce the reshuffled Cabinet.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I declare an interest in the matter to the House, as CAFOD are quoted, and through my local parish I help to raise money for CAFOD.

    The desire of CAFOD is that the money invested in fossil fuels is spent on renewables instead, not just cut from the overseas aid budget. I profoundly disagree with cutting the overseas aid budget overall, though will support changes in use and distribution.

    I urge the House to reject this Statement.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    It is difficult to get elected when the electorate are very left-wing, vote for left-wing parties, and do not bother to read the manifestos. Not having a private message increases the likelihood of the people who did vote reading the manifestos before making a decision on who to vote for.
    Oh come on, TSR UKIP's popularity has nothing to do with manifesto pledges; rather a mixture of getting the votes of all the TSR racists (n.b. not implying that TSR UKIP are racist, merely that they would be the party most popular among racists), and the cult of personality the party appropriates from RL UKIP that appeals to the impressionable and poorly-educated. Indeed, I suspect the only reason you'd rather people did read manifestos is so more people can be influenced by your six billion pictures of Farage.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    Quotes from some person we have not met and do not know are all well and good, but I cannot see a bill form 1664 or anytime around then which seem to suggest what you are. Present a bill or all we can do is assume that it is simply tradition which can be broken.
    I believe the most recent block of legislation was in 1866 with amendments in 1879 and 1921 which establishes a consolidated fund and how it is operated. Then we get a National Audit Act 1983 (amendments in 2008 and 2011) which tighten up parliamentary control further.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I believe the most recent block of legislation was in 1866 with amendments in 1879 and 1921 which establishes a consolidated fund and how it is operated. Then we get a National Audit Act 1983 (amendments in 2008 and 2011) which tighten up parliamentary control further.
    Both seem to talk about teh public accounts committee. Which don't exist in the MHoC. And unless I'm blind I can't see anything prohibiting the transfer of funds between departments. The issue we have in TSR Land is that we don't have years, or, if you would prefer due to teh fixed parliament act we have 5 years in 6 months, if you assume that the budget was given in the equivalent of September then it is about the start of the new tax year now.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    Both seem to talk about teh public accounts committee. Which don't exist in the MHoC. And unless I'm blind I can't see anything prohibiting the transfer of funds between departments. The issue we have in TSR Land is that we don't have years, or, if you would prefer due to teh fixed parliament act we have 5 years in 6 months, if you assume that the budget was given in the equivalent of September then it is about the start of the new tax year now.
    All the funds flow through the consolidation fund, appropriation acts passed to allow the funds to be appropriated, that's part of the reason that budgets are de facto votes of confidence, failure to pass the appropriation act shuts down the government, and if you want to start a new tax year can we have a new budget please? Didn't think so. This "SoI" is which number when it comes to a very short statement to say that we have actually had a SoI?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    All the funds flow through the consolidation fund, appropriation acts passed to allow the funds to be appropriated, that's part of the reason that budgets are de facto votes of confidence, failure to pass the appropriation act shuts down the government, and if you want to start a new tax year can we have a new budget please? Didn't think so. This "SoI" is which number when it comes to a very short statement to say that we have actually had a SoI?
    SOI's are ment to be short as they are only on one topic.

    And the bills in relation to the budget are yet to be presented to the house. Therefore we can change the departmental spending before that act is passed? Are you happy with that?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    SOI's are ment to be short as they are only on one topic.

    And the bills in relation to the budget are yet to be presented to the house. Therefore we can change the departmental spending before that act is passed? Are you happy with that?
    SoIs are meant to be as short or long as is necessary, however they are also supposed to be relating to the department making it and not a different one.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    SoIs are meant to be as short or long as is necessary, however they are also supposed to be relating to the department making it and not a different one.
    some SOI's are co-authored as its an area where departments have to agree.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Both seem to talk about teh public accounts committee. Which don't exist in the MHoC. And unless I'm blind I can't see anything prohibiting the transfer of funds between departments. The issue we have in TSR Land is that we don't have years, or, if you would prefer due to teh fixed parliament act we have 5 years in 6 months, if you assume that the budget was given in the equivalent of September then it is about the start of the new tax year now.
    Because MHoC law is presumed to reflect RL law, in the absence of a PAC there would be no delegating power and accordingly such a thing wouldn't be possible to enact through an SOI at all; only an Act of Parliament would be sufficient.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    some SOI's are co-authored as its an area where departments have to agree.
    But once again, this is not one.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Because MHoC law is presumed to reflect RL law, in the absence of a PAC there would be no delegating power and accordingly such a thing wouldn't be possible to enact through an SOI at all; only an Act of Parliament would be sufficient.
    This is one of the times that having a basis in RL law doesn't work well.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    This is one of the times that having a basis in RL law doesn't work well.
    Then pass an amendment to reflect that. I'm not arguing what the case should be, I'm arguing what the case is.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Then pass an amendment to reflect that. I'm not arguing what the case should be, I'm arguing what the case is.
    No I agree. I'm just stating that in this case it's awkward because there clearly isn't the activity to have all the committees that IRL has.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    No I agree. I'm just stating that in this case it's awkward because there clearly isn't the activity to have all the committees that IRL has.
    But it is also not unreasonable for powers held by committees to be rolled into relevant departments as necessary.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    But it is also not unreasonable for powers held by committees to be rolled into relevant departments as necessary.
    Technically that would require a GD amendment or a bill.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    Technically that would require a GD amendment or a bill.
    I guess taxes can be reduced to 0 then.
 
 
 
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: February 21, 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • 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.