Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

General Election Results – May 2015 Watch

    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adam9317)
    it still stays at a month

    End of 4 weeks- Voting review. Low activity given a warning
    End of 6 weeks- Any highlighted low activity not increased triggers by election
    End of 8 weeks- Voting review. Low activity given a warning.
    End of 12 weeks- Any highlighted low activity not increased triggers by election

    = No by election every 2 weeks
    And what if you get a low activity warning because there were only 2 bills and you missed one? If you want to do it differently in UKIP then fine but just remember if you did this then where you currently replace your mp's you would lose the seat.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    But election fatuige would be massive, we only tend to have one by-election every term. Having more is just unnecessary i still say that it wouldn't increase activity enough.
    I disagree. I think if more people have a substantial role i.e Being an MP, they'd take part more than if they weren't an MP.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    And what if you get a low activity warning because there were only 2 bills and you missed one? If you want to do it differently in UKIP then fine but just remember if you did this then where you currently replace your mp's you would lose the seat.
    Very rarely are there only 2 bills per month!

    How about we said, a review can take place every 4 weeks, or 4 bills- whatever comes first!

    And maybe drop limit to 75%?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    But election fatuige would be massive, we only tend to have one by-election every term. Having more is just unnecessary
    If party leaders did their jobs properly by replacing MPs before they drop below 80% there would not be any by-elections.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I disagree. I think if more people have a substantial role i.e Being an MP, they'd take part more than if they weren't an MP.
    then why don't we have 100% turn out on all bills?

    (Original post by adam9317)
    Very rarely are there only 2 bills per month!

    How about we said, a review can take place every 4 weeks, or 4 bills- whatever comes first!

    And maybe drop limit to 75%?
    There have been times...

    personally im happy the way things are now, too much upheaval and rapid replacement of MP's will only cause issues. By giving people a month we let the party leadership get on top of the situation before it gets out of hand. Having only 2 weeks is a tiny amount of time and in cases such as exams we expect the house to go dead for a while much like around Christmas.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    then why don't we have 100% turn out on all bills?


    There have been times...

    personally im happy the way things are now, too much upheaval and rapid replacement of MP's will only cause issues. By giving people a month we let the party leadership get on top of the situation before it gets out of hand. Having only 2 weeks is a tiny amount of time and in cases such as exams we expect the house to go dead for a while much like around Christmas.
    Because there will always be a few members, especially from March-June, that will have other things to do than be on TSR. Some people can't always be active. However, we have plenty of active members who aren't MPs.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Because there will always be a few members, especially from March-June, that will have other things to do than be on TSR. Some people can't always be active. However, we have plenty of active members who aren't MPs.
    So why has voter turnout rarely been over 80% on items? It was 66% on average recently. If we had an eve rage turnout of about 85% then I'd support this but I just don't think the demand in here except in perhaps the smaller parties.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adam9317)
    In this house, a by election is only called when votes hit 60% and stay like that for a month.

    Why not change it, 80% and if it stays below for 2 weeks, then a by election
    The low turnouts were not coming from the right. My guess is greens and socialists.

    Keep the rules as they are but abolish seat sharing so that struggling parties are forced to pay for their crime and more seats go to by-election.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MJK91)
    I can only assume Labour will push for STV ballot reforms.
    Not quite.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    My my what a depressing result for us this just compounds my miserable start to the week. It'd be interesting to see where our votes disappeared, although obviously this is impossible.

    Having said that after last term (which was awful on our part) we perhaps deserved what we got Alas rebuilding from the ashes and all.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Also for those of you arguing for 65 seats it would've produced
    labour: 19
    Tory: 16
    green: 11
    ukip: 9
    liberal: 6
    socalist: 4

    only the big party's benifit and I highly doubt that labour could fill 19 seats actively, but fair play to them if they can.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Also for those of you arguing for 65 seats it would've produced
    labour: 19
    Tory: 16
    green: 11
    ukip: 9
    liberal: 6
    socalist: 4

    only the big party's benifit and I highly doubt that labour could fill 19 seats actively, but fair play to them if they can.
    Lets stick with 50 then

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Lets stick with 50 then

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    It'd also mean that the 20 seat rule would become 26 seats if applied the same way but I'm glad you can see how bad it'd be.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Lets stick with 50 then
    50-60 seats is ideal for the MHoC.

    You proposed a MHoL in your manifesto, didn't you?
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by It's a Shame)
    50-60 seats is ideal for the MHoC.

    You proposed a MHoL in your manifesto, didn't you?
    We did. I think a 50 seat MHoC and 12-16 seat MHoL will be fine. There is also the Crisis Committee, which I hope no one's forgotten about

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Not quite.
    Shocker. Convenient that.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Greens going back to three terms ago. 8-6-13-8.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    We did. I think a 50 seat MHoC and 12-16 seat MHoL will be fine. There is also the Crisis Committee, which I hope no one's forgotten about
    Yep, I'd love a MHoL. I can't wait for the Crisis Committee!
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks to Toronto for posting the results in my absence.

    Congratulations to all who won seats in the new Parliament.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    Thanks to Toronto for posting the results in my absence.

    Congratulations to all who won seats in the new Parliament.
    Welcome back, Birch
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling about your GCSE 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

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