Turn on thread page Beta

TSR General Election September 2014 – VOTE HERE! watch

  • View Poll Results: Cast your vote in the TSR General Election:
    TSR Conservative & Unionist Party
    104
    16.64%
    TSR Green Party
    157
    25.12%
    TSR Liberal Party
    57
    9.12%
    TSR UKIP
    88
    14.08%
    TSR Socialist Party
    58
    9.28%
    Matthew_Lowson, Independent
    14
    2.24%
    TSR Labour Party
    109
    17.44%
    TSR Libertarian Party
    20
    3.20%
    Spoilt Ballot
    18
    2.88%

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)
    Out of interest, would there be anything I put forward that you would seek to change if we did go ahead with it?
    Sorry, meant to reply to this earlier but forgot!

    There isn't actually anything huge I find to disagree with, personally. I agree with your proposals for recalling MPs, the right to industrial action and the sentiment regarding teachers. I would say the minimum wage plans don't go as far as is needed but is a step in the right direction. You seem to have written a manifesto that largely manages to avoid alienating either the left or right, actually!

    What is your actual preference towards our relationship with Europe, though?
    Offline

    17
    (Original post by Blue Meltwater)
    Sorry, meant to reply to this earlier but forgot!

    There isn't actually anything huge I find to disagree with, personally. I agree with your proposals for recalling MPs, the right to industrial action and the sentiment regarding teachers. I would say the minimum wage plans don't go as far as is needed but is a step in the right direction. You seem to have written a manifesto that largely manages to avoid alienating either the left or right, actually!

    What is your actual preference towards our relationship with Europe, though?
    Personally if I was given a vote in a referendum, I'd vote to leave the EU as it is not what we signed up to when we joined back in 1973. We joined a Common Market. Times have changed and Great Britain is no longer a country which would be isolated economically from the lack of membership of a political union as it would have potentially been back in 1973.

    My firm belief is and always will be in our country that it is our parliament which is sovereign, and there is a problem for our parliament (and all parliaments within the EU) when there is a parliament directing ours when we don't elect 90.3% of the members who vote on those directions. The same goes for the National Assembly in France or the Bundestag in Germany, they elect a small minority which is not enough to prevent a direction by a majority. A fundamental flaw is that the 73 MEPs the country elects is essentially powerless to prevent a direction from Europe. All MEPs may vote against something, but the majority of EU members can force it through.

    I am aware that there are some benefits of membership of the European Union, such as free movement across European borders, but I don't feel that these outweigh the fact that the EU is no longer what it was formed all those years to be

    If an MP I intend to put down a European Conversation, asking people, how do they want us to get the best from our relationship with Europe? What changes if any do they want to see in the relationship between our MEPs and Brussels.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    A couple of questions from me:

    Matthew:
    Right to recall - how would you make this work in the House, where we have list-based MPs without constituencies?

    Labour:
    What will you do differently to make the House more ‘accessible and fun’?

    Libertarians:
    How do you propose to reform the welfare system, particularly in light of your previous reforms?

    Socialists:
    How high do you believe our upper tax rate should be?

    UKIP:
    We’ve already held a referendum on Europe. Why should we hold one again?

    What particular bits of ‘red tape’ do you propose to abolish?

    Greens:
    Where do you stand on the creation of an English parliament?

    Conservatives:
    Where in particular should we expand our armed forces, and how will we pay for such expansion?
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    Voted for the Greens .

    My views:

    Conservatives - Not keen on the cross-party attacks. Not keen either on restricting the "lowest skilled immigration" and uncertain about the expansion of intelligence services if this means more snooping on private citizens/residents.

    Greens - Good manifesto. We do face a democratic deficit. Only thing I'm not entirely certain about is the abolition of the British monarchy.

    Liberals - I like the idea of referendums. Good manifesto on the whole.

    UKIP - Yeah, we'll always be ideologically opposed, especially on immigration. As for the deportation of serious criminals - where are you going to deport them to if they're British citizens?

    Socialists - Still not sure about the abolition of the monarchy. On the whole, a good manifesto, though.

    Matthew - Good manifesto as well.

    Labour - Again, not sure on the abolition of the monarchy. And again, good manifesto.

    Libertarians - The proposed welfare reforms are vague, and I am not keen on further privatisation.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    UKIP:
    We’ve already held a referendum on Europe. Why should we hold one again?

    What particular bits of ‘red tape’ do you propose to abolish?
    The last EU referendum was just that, an EU referendum. The Scottish independence referendum displayed the need for a wider vision about the future. Before a referendum is held UKIP will lay out its view for Britain in a post-EU world. UKIP want to answer the questions about trade, cross-border crime fighting and any other concerns before the referendum. We do not expect the British people to vote on a referendum where one of the options gives extreme uncertainty. We believe setting out our vision with the steps we will take towards ensuring a strong post-EU Britain will add weight in the European debate, eliminate uncertainty in the one option, and present a clear choice to the British people.

    Currently under employment law a health and safety assessment needs to be carried out for every new employee. We propose a change in legislation allowing the employer to conduct an assessment once for one place of work and hire multiple employees under the one assessment. For SME's every £10k paid to an employee incurs an additional 12.5% national insurance rate. We want to reduce national insurance rate payable by SME's encouraging them to employ more staff. UKIP would also like to end the practice of recruitment agencies charging people they are looking to recruit to bring about greater equality between job seekers. The abolishment of injury litigation in favour of self-responsability except in high-risk roles. A small employer should not need to pay an additional fee to send new employees on a box lifting course, ending fears for SME's about being sued by staff for trivial injuries. A more obvious one is the introduction of instant hirings. A company should be able to instantly hire someone without having to go through interviews or selections. Many SME's do this already but larger enterprises with dedicated human resource departments do not. There are more but I do not want to reveal all of UKIP's legislative ideas.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    vote labour


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    Greens:
    Where do you stand on the creation of an English parliament?
    My view is that it would be one solution to dealing with the unfairness of the current system, but its sheer size might make it unworkable. But it's also true that federalising the English regions could prove an unpopular move. I guess it depends on the will of the people.

    (Original post by Kittiara)
    Voted for the Greens .
    You're back!!
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Blue Meltwater)

    You're back!!
    Shhh... :ninjagirl:
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    A couple of questions from me:

    Matthew:
    Right to recall - how would you make this work in the House, where we have list-based MPs without constituencies?

    Labour:
    What will you do differently to make the House more ‘accessible and fun’?

    Libertarians:
    How do you propose to reform the welfare system, particularly in light of your previous reforms?

    Socialists:
    How high do you believe our upper tax rate should be?

    UKIP:
    We’ve already held a referendum on Europe. Why should we hold one again?

    What particular bits of ‘red tape’ do you propose to abolish?

    Greens:
    Where do you stand on the creation of an English parliament?

    Conservatives:
    Where in particular should we expand our armed forces, and how will we pay for such expansion?
    Our focus would be around intelligence services, drones (both offensive and reconnaissance) and an expansion of our currently depleted navy. I'm sure one of the leadership will elaborate but working from a basis of more naval capability we then need enough F-35's for defending the island, from there I would lean toward equipping our carriers with offensive drones to reduce the risk to our soldiers.

    Not only have we made savings this parliament but our fiscal position was already around 30bn better than RL. By abolishing the universality of the residents income (a policy backed by labour in their manifesto) we can use some of those proceeds.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kittiara)
    Voted for the Greens .

    My views:

    Conservatives - Not keen on the cross-party attacks. Not keen either on restricting the "lowest skilled immigration" and uncertain about the expansion of intelligence services if this means more snooping on private citizens/residents.

    Greens - Good manifesto. We do face a democratic deficit. Only thing I'm not entirely certain about is the abolition of the British monarchy.

    Liberals - I like the idea of referendums. Good manifesto on the whole.

    UKIP - Yeah, we'll always be ideologically opposed, especially on immigration. As for the deportation of serious criminals - where are you going to deport them to if they're British citizens?

    Socialists - Still not sure about the abolition of the monarchy. On the whole, a good manifesto, though.

    Matthew - Good manifesto as well.

    Labour - Again, not sure on the abolition of the monarchy. And again, good manifesto.

    Libertarians - The proposed welfare reforms are vague, and I am not keen on further privatisation.
    British criminals wouldn't be deported, only foreign criminals that at the moment we cannot deport due to human rights laws
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukip72)
    British criminals wouldn't be deported, only foreign criminals that at the moment we cannot deport due to human rights laws
    So we could deport US born Boris if he committed a crime? (I don't mean fashion or style crimes of which he is guilty of many, and the vanity projects are not crimes unfortunately)
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    So we could deport US born Boris if he committed a crime? (I don't mean fashion or style crimes of which he is guilty of many, and the vanity projects are not crimes unfortunately)
    Think we can make an exception for Boris...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukip72)
    Think we can make an exception for Boris...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Would you deport their families too?
    Offline

    17
    (Original post by Birchington)
    A couple of questions from me:

    Matthew:
    Right to recall - how would you make this work in the House, where we have list-based MPs without constituencies?
    It would need development but at the moment my proposal for the right of recall would be as follows.

    After the election result is declared there would be a quota required for a recall of a member of parliament. This quota would be one more than the average number of votes required to elect each MP in the election.

    The quota therefore would be calculated as this Quota = (votes ÷ seats) + 1

    Using the 2014 Spring election results the quotas would have been as follows

    TSR Labour 172 votes and 13 seats means (172 ÷ 13 = 13.23) + 1 = 14.23 rounded up means the quota is a petition of 15 members to recall a TSR Labour MP

    TSR Conservative 131 votes and 9 seats means (131 ÷ 9 = 14.56) + 1 = 15.56 rounded up means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR Conservative MP

    TSR Socialist 98 votes and 7 seats means (98 ÷ 7 = 14) + 1 = 15 means the quota is a petition of 15 members to recall a TSR Socialist MP

    TSR UKIP 87 votes and 6 seats means (87 ÷ 6 = 14.5) + 1 = 15.5 means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR UKIP MP

    TSR Green Party 87 votes and 6 seats means (87 ÷ 6 = 14.5) + 1 = 15.5 means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR Green MP

    TSR Liberal 61 votes and 4 seats means (61 ÷ 4 = 15.25) + 1 = 16.25 means the quota is a petition of 17 members to recall a TSR Liberal MP

    TSR Libertarian 49 votes and 3 seats means (49 ÷ 3 = 16.33) + 1 = 17.33 means the quota is a petition of 18 members to recall a TSR Libertarian MP

    In the case of an independent MP being elected, their quota would be calculated based upon the number of seats the MP would have received had they been a political party. In the case of the Spring 2014 election Escutcheon would have received two seats had he stood as a political party therefore his quota would be calculated as

    (28 ÷ 2 = 14) + 1 = 15 Meaning a petition of 15 would be required to recall this independent member.

    If an Independent MP was elected and would have been entitled to just the 1 seat then their quota is one more than the number of votes they received in the election though I'm looking to see whether there is a better scenario than that is it would have meant though each party could have a recall with 15/16/17/18 voters petitioning it, barnetlad would have required a petition of 28 to remove him


    The procedure would be this

    Members of TSR with a desire to recall a member of parliament must notify the speaker of their wish to do so. Members will have the right to either recall an MP from the party, or a particular MP.

    From notifying the speaker, they have one month to gather the signatories required to secure the removal of a member. Members requesting a recall must contact the speaker to be added to the petition

    If the signatories have nominated the recall of an individual member then the member will resign their seat in the House. If the signatories have nominated the recall of a member from a political party then the Party concerned would nominate one of its MPs to stand down.

    - MPs would NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition

    - Members of active parties (i.e. Parties which have official status in the game - e.g. their own sub forum) would NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition.

    - If a President is adopted then likewise they will NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition.

    - Signatories must have been entitled to vote at the previous election, namely have been a member of TSR before the election and have the 150 posts.

    - Signatories are only allowed to recall 2 MPs during a term.

    - Recalled seats would be contested at the by-election. MPs recalled will have the right to restand for election
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)
    It would need development but at the moment my proposal for the right of recall would be as follows.

    After the election result is declared there would be a quota required for a recall of a member of parliament. This quota would be one more than the average number of votes required to elect each MP in the election.

    The quota therefore would be calculated as this Quota = (votes ÷ seats) + 1

    Using the 2014 Spring election results the quotas would have been as follows

    TSR Labour 172 votes and 13 seats means (172 ÷ 13 = 13.23) + 1 = 14.23 rounded up means the quota is a petition of 15 members to recall a TSR Labour MP

    TSR Conservative 131 votes and 9 seats means (131 ÷ 9 = 14.56) + 1 = 15.56 rounded up means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR Conservative MP

    TSR Socialist 98 votes and 7 seats means (98 ÷ 7 = 14) + 1 = 15 means the quota is a petition of 15 members to recall a TSR Socialist MP

    TSR UKIP 87 votes and 6 seats means (87 ÷ 6 = 14.5) + 1 = 15.5 means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR UKIP MP

    TSR Green Party 87 votes and 6 seats means (87 ÷ 6 = 14.5) + 1 = 15.5 means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR Green MP

    TSR Liberal 61 votes and 4 seats means (61 ÷ 4 = 15.25) + 1 = 16.25 means the quota is a petition of 17 members to recall a TSR Liberal MP

    TSR Libertarian 49 votes and 3 seats means (49 ÷ 3 = 16.33) + 1 = 17.33 means the quota is a petition of 18 members to recall a TSR Libertarian MP

    In the case of an independent MP being elected, their quota would be calculated based upon the number of seats the MP would have received had they been a political party. In the case of the Spring 2014 election Escutcheon would have received two seats had he stood as a political party therefore his quota would be calculated as

    (28 ÷ 2 = 14) + 1 = 15 Meaning a petition of 15 would be required to recall this independent member.

    If an Independent MP was elected and would have been entitled to just the 1 seat then their quota is one more than the number of votes they received in the election though I'm looking to see whether there is a better scenario than that is it would have meant though each party could have a recall with 15/16/17/18 voters petitioning it, barnetlad would have required a petition of 28 to remove him


    The procedure would be this

    Members of TSR with a desire to recall a member of parliament must notify the speaker of their wish to do so. Members will have the right to either recall an MP from the party, or a particular MP.

    From notifying the speaker, they have one month to gather the signatories required to secure the removal of a member. Members requesting a recall must contact the speaker to be added to the petition

    If the signatories have nominated the recall of an individual member then the member will resign their seat in the House. If the signatories have nominated the recall of a member from a political party then the Party concerned would nominate one of its MPs to stand down.

    - MPs would NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition

    - Members of active parties (i.e. Parties which have official status in the game - e.g. their own sub forum) would NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition.

    - If a President is adopted then likewise they will NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition.

    - Signatories must have been entitled to vote at the previous election, namely have been a member of TSR before the election and have the 150 posts.

    - Signatories are only allowed to recall 2 MPs during a term.

    - Recalled seats would be contested at the by-election. MPs recalled will have the right to restand for election
    Why?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)
    It would need development but at the moment my proposal for the right of recall would be as follows.

    After the election result is declared there would be a quota required for a recall of a member of parliament. This quota would be one more than the average number of votes required to elect each MP in the election.

    The quota therefore would be calculated as this Quota = (votes ÷ seats) + 1

    Using the 2014 Spring election results the quotas would have been as follows

    TSR Labour 172 votes and 13 seats means (172 ÷ 13 = 13.23) + 1 = 14.23 rounded up means the quota is a petition of 15 members to recall a TSR Labour MP

    TSR Conservative 131 votes and 9 seats means (131 ÷ 9 = 14.56) + 1 = 15.56 rounded up means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR Conservative MP

    TSR Socialist 98 votes and 7 seats means (98 ÷ 7 = 14) + 1 = 15 means the quota is a petition of 15 members to recall a TSR Socialist MP

    TSR UKIP 87 votes and 6 seats means (87 ÷ 6 = 14.5) + 1 = 15.5 means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR UKIP MP

    TSR Green Party 87 votes and 6 seats means (87 ÷ 6 = 14.5) + 1 = 15.5 means the quota is a petition of 16 members to recall a TSR Green MP

    TSR Liberal 61 votes and 4 seats means (61 ÷ 4 = 15.25) + 1 = 16.25 means the quota is a petition of 17 members to recall a TSR Liberal MP

    TSR Libertarian 49 votes and 3 seats means (49 ÷ 3 = 16.33) + 1 = 17.33 means the quota is a petition of 18 members to recall a TSR Libertarian MP

    In the case of an independent MP being elected, their quota would be calculated based upon the number of seats the MP would have received had they been a political party. In the case of the Spring 2014 election Escutcheon would have received two seats had he stood as a political party therefore his quota would be calculated as

    (28 ÷ 2 = 14) + 1 = 15 Meaning a petition of 15 would be required to recall this independent member.

    If an Independent MP was elected and would have been entitled to just the 1 seat then their quota is one more than the number of votes they received in the election though I'm looking to see whether there is a better scenario than that is it would have meant though each party could have a recall with 15/16/17/18 voters petitioning it, barnetlad would have required a petition of 28 to remove him


    The procedure would be this

    Members of TSR with a desire to recall a member of parliament must notify the speaker of their wish to do so. Members will have the right to either recall an MP from the party, or a particular MP.

    From notifying the speaker, they have one month to gather the signatories required to secure the removal of a member. Members requesting a recall must contact the speaker to be added to the petition

    If the signatories have nominated the recall of an individual member then the member will resign their seat in the House. If the signatories have nominated the recall of a member from a political party then the Party concerned would nominate one of its MPs to stand down.

    - MPs would NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition

    - Members of active parties (i.e. Parties which have official status in the game - e.g. their own sub forum) would NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition.

    - If a President is adopted then likewise they will NOT be allowed to sign a recall petition.

    - Signatories must have been entitled to vote at the previous election, namely have been a member of TSR before the election and have the 150 posts.

    - Signatories are only allowed to recall 2 MPs during a term.

    - Recalled seats would be contested at the by-election. MPs recalled will have the right to restand for election
    The problem is, most of the people who vote in the elections don't really care about the MHOC and once they vote they wont return.

    I would find it very hard to find 16 non MHOCers to want to recall a MP
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I don't like the idea of by-elections being forced. We can't even punish failing parties because of A83 so I'm not sure why the public should be treated differently.
    Offline

    17
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Why?
    (Original post by adam9317)
    x

    The main proposal would be in for in real life, but Birchington asked how would I make this work across the House of Commons as a forum. I do believe that there should be the right open to recall our members, even if it is as I appreciate what you are saying not very likely that members are going to be petitioning for a recall, but hopefully MPs would do

    I cannot think of another reasonable number, anything less is too few anything more puts the right out of reach.

    The reason for the ban on MPs or party members being signatories is essentially using plain common sense. It is to stop people essentially trying to block members from being MPs in the first place. Look at this way if we give MPs and party members the right to recall an MP, Tories can essentially block Labour's leader from being an MP and vice versa
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)
    The main proposal would be in for in real life, but Birchington asked how would I make this work across the House of Commons as a forum. I do believe that there should be the right open to recall our members, even if it is as I appreciate what you are saying not very likely that members are going to be petitioning for a recall, but hopefully MPs would do

    I cannot think of another reasonable number, anything less is too few anything more puts the right out of reach.

    The reason for the ban on MPs or party members being signatories is essentially using plain common sense. It is to stop people essentially trying to block members from being MPs in the first place. Look at this way if we give MPs and party members the right to recall an MP, Tories can essentially block Labour's leader from being an MP and vice versa

    I understand what you mean re. no MPs and I understand your reasons, but I don't think it will work, and I don't think anyone will recall any MPs
    Offline

    17
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I don't like the idea of by-elections being forced. We can't even punish failing parties because of A83 so I'm not sure why the public should be treated differently.
    It's them who we are accountable to, not the parties. The Labour leader doesn't have to justify himself to the Conservative members, but at the end of the day, he has to justify himself to the country.

    Wasn't it you (could be completely wrong here) who suggested when you were prime minister that the House should hold a regular by-election with all parties with two or more seats donating a seat to be contested at it? I know that was suggested, and for some reason my brain says it was your idea, but I could be wrong and if I am
 
 
 
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: October 6, 2014
The home of Results and Clearing

2,501

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Do you want your parents to be with you when you collect your A-level results?

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.