V30 - Health checks in schools act (brighter futures bill) 2006 Watch

Poll: Should this Bill pass into Law?
Aye (14)
38.89%
Nay (17)
47.22%
Abstain (5)
13.89%
This discussion is closed.
bikerx23
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 12 years ago
#1
Health checks in schools act (brighter futures bill) 2006 (Liberal Democrats)BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SOURCE: http://www.studentbmj.com/issues/01/07/papers/241.php

"Reports suggest that the prevalence of obesity among children is increasing. Reilly et al reported that, even by the age of 5, the prevalence of obesity was higher than that expected from the national standards1 and that this persisted into the teenage years."

"one in five 9 year olds and one in three 11 year old girls are overweight"

"levels of obesity in Britain are increasing at an appreciable rate in primary school children"

1. All primary schools, public and state, are required to have their children properly examined not only for health-checks that simply record the data. If there is a need for concern, a qualified nutritionist should be on hand to discuss with parents dietary adaptations necessary to curb whatever issue there happens to be with the child's current diet.

2. These checks are to be carried out upon induction to the school (reception), and subsequently in years 2, 5 and 8.

3. Health checkup sessions are to last a day and be overseen by a trained nurse, properly briefed in relevant indicators. If there is need for blood testing or any other invasive procedure, a further session must be arranged, allowing adequate time for parents to give written consent for such procedures. It is entirely the choice of the parent/legal guardian whether to work on the advice of the external health experts.
0
RobbieC
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#2
Report 12 years ago
#2
Something strange. I was never offered the chance to amend the bill. I am not happy it has gone to voting without me being allowed to submit an ameneded version.
0
bikerx23
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 12 years ago
#3
You are not offered a chance to amend a bill - you submit an amendment to the speaker when you wish to amend a bill, and if that is not done, or some indicator of your desire to do so, then it will go to voting.

You failed to submit an amendment or show any desire to do so, hence it went to voting.
0
RobbieC
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#4
Report 12 years ago
#4
Well isn't that just bloody stupid...?

I suppose I have to submit a bill now to make sure that people ARE given an opportunity to amend their bills in the way they desired to before they are ARBITRARILY sent to voting, then? Jesus.

Speakers in this house are generally very hardworking, and I generally offer my support to them. But right now, some common sense needs to be injected in cases like these.
0
bikerx23
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 12 years ago
#5
This is the way it has always been - it is on the responsibility on the parties to keep the speaker informed as to their requirements with a bill, and not the speakers responsibility to nanny you all and send you constant nagging PMs ensuring that everything is ok. If you like we could also get you some secretaties so you dont have to do any of the work yourselves.

Bills are not arbitrarily sent to voting - they are processed according to the rules and procedures of the house. Just because you failed to stick to them does not mean you can make a whole song and dance about the system - it is your fault. During my tenure as speaker I have only been contacted once mid-reading or prior to a readings ending in order to edit a bill, and that was with the recent legal bill which was withdrawn.

Your claims about my position are fallacious and ridiculous - You are all adults and the position of the speaker does not gift me with mind reading skills, hence it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to keep the speaker informed of developments within your subforums or minds.
If it is required for the speaker to contact the proposing party of the bill between every session then it will make the process unnecesarily punctuated - No other parties have difficulty with the current system, and I even tabled an amendment to make it easier to amend bills allowing for up to a weeks cessation of reading. You have no grounds to be dissatisfied with my actions, only your own. If you still do not believe this to be the case, then I would recommend you challenge my position formally.
Perhaps if you had submitted more bills under your tenure of the liberal democrat party then you would have known this.
Alternatively, you could have read the introduction thread where they are outlined.
0
RobbieC
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#6
Report 12 years ago
#6
You really don't enjoy being wrong, do you?

Either way, I can't be arsed trying to be right anymore. So well done.

Look forward to my legislation that will hopefully make the process "unnecessarily punctuated" because I don't feel the current system is good enough. I doubt any two bills in your tenure have spent the exact same amount of time on their first reading. This is far too arbitrary - and I hope it will change soon.
0
bikerx23
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 12 years ago
#7
Infact, all bills bar one have spent 4 days in their first reading, this being the legislated amount.

Fortunately, I cannot be wrong on this issue, because I am merely acting on the rules of this model parliament - Being that no one else has seen the need to comment on such an issue in the past, I dont see this as an issue at all - If you are going to continue to try and lay blame for your personal failure then go ahead, but if you look back at the other examples of this there has been, the individuals in that case lamented their own disorganisation, not doing as you are and blaming whoever you can.
0
Nefarious
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#8
Report 12 years ago
#8
In this instance I agree with the speaker.

I am saddened to have to vote against this bill. It attempts to address some important issues but it's present content is not viable.
0
Nightowl
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#9
Report 12 years ago
#9
I think this is our version of the other week's Martins V Cameron duel

I chose to abstain from this vote because although I agree with what it was getting at, it didn't by admission of the Lib Dems stand up to scrutiny. i hope an ammended version will follow.
0
SuperhansFavouriteAlsatian
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report 12 years ago
#10
The speaker is entirely correct. It is the job of the parties to ensure the latest version of the bill is in the hands of the speaker, not the other way around. This is how it is and how it has always been. Don't blame him because your leader isn't paying attention.
0
bikerx23
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 12 years ago
#11
(Original post by Nightowl)
I think this is our version of the other week's Martins V Cameron duel
And the speaker is correct in both cases.

Thanks for your support Nefarious and DanGrover
0
RobbieC
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#12
Report 12 years ago
#12
(Original post by Nightowl)
I chose to abstain from this vote because although I agree with what it was getting at, it didn't by admission of the Lib Dems stand up to scrutiny. i hope an ammended version will follow.
You are right to do so... I myself didn't want the bill to go through in this form, really.

And an amended version will follow, probably under some new title though for technicalities sake.
0
bikerx23
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 12 years ago
#13
(Original post by RobbieC)
I myself didn't want the bill to go through in this form, really.
You were given every chance to intervene.
Feel free to submit a amended version at a later date
0
RK
  • TSR Community Staff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 12 years ago
#14
As far as I can tell the Speaker has acted wholly within the rules set out by the rest of us.

It is a parties responsibility to inform the Speaker of anything to be on with a bill once it has been submitted.

You submit a bill and then the Speaker keeps passing it on to the next stage until voting is complete. If the submitter doesn't want the process to go that way (ie they have amendments or want to pull the bill, then they contact the Speaker).


As it is, I think you'll find I mentioned the fact there had been no amendments and that the bill was soon going to go to vote without the necessary amendments in the first reading thread, shortly before the thread was closed.

What I feel has happened here is yet another person or group has been unable to familiarise themselves with the basic rules we have. Rather than being bothered to do things for themselves, they wish to be spoon fed every step of the way nd be told exactly what they need to do next without thinking for themselves. I have enough of that all day at school. I'd have thought people were mature enough here to have grown out of such a habit. However will some of you cope in the real world?
0
bikerx23
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 12 years ago
#15
(Original post by Roger Kirk)
What I feel has happened here is yet another person or group has been unable to familiarise themselves with the basic rules we have. Rather than being bothered to do things for themselves, they wish to be spoon fed every step of the way nd be told exactly what they need to do next without thinking for themselves. I have enough of that all day at school. I'd have thought people were mature enough here to have grown out of such a habit. However will some of you cope in the real world?
:congrats: exactly how I feel on the issue.
0
RK
  • TSR Community Staff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#16
Report 12 years ago
#16
(Original post by RobbieC)
Something strange. I was never offered the chance to amend the bill. I am not happy it has gone to voting without me being allowed to submit an ameneded version.
So you feel an amended version of the bill is necesary?

Yet you still vote in favour of the bill?

How bizarre. You feel some legislation is not up to scratch, not good enough, needs changing. Yet you STILL VOTE FOR IT?

I cannot get my head around that. What other behaviour can we expect form you? Personally I think we've seen it all now. I cannot think of anything beyond voting for something you essentially don't think is workable.

What will happen now if the bill is to pass? Will you leave some clearly unworkable Act there for us all to follow. An act which will cause no end of problems because it wasn't amended by you in time.

I hope you are the one to ensure something is done to limit the problems this will cause should the aye voters win here.


This is a truly irresponsible move on your behalf.
0
Carl
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#17
Report 12 years ago
#17
Lib Dems screw up on established procedure to their own detriment....where have we seen that before????

Everyone knows it is up to the proposing parties to submit amendments before the end of the first reading, or at least signal to the speaker that amendments are in the works. As far as I can see neither of these things was done, and so the Speaker was right to submit the Bill to the vote of the House.
0
NDGAARONDI
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#18
Report 12 years ago
#18
I thought my Homicide Bill would be the last example.
0
RK
  • TSR Community Staff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#19
Report 12 years ago
#19
(Original post by NDGAARONDI)
I thought my Homicide Bill would be the last example.
Last example of what?
0
NDGAARONDI
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#20
Report 12 years ago
#20
(Original post by Roger Kirk)
Last example of what?
With amendments failed to be completed. I hope I'm thinking straight. Not had much sleep recently...
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (291)
37.55%
No - but I will (55)
7.1%
No - I don't want to (56)
7.23%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (373)
48.13%

Watched Threads

View All