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

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    I don't know what her ban status is, but she won't be coming back into Labour whilst I'm leading it.
    If it's not a perma I personally would be happy to have her in the socialists but would obviously have to check with other party members first.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Aye, I am confident UKIP would fill extra MP seats, the Liberals have boasted the Liberals have to possibility to fill more seats, and I have it on good word the Conservatives can. Rejecting this proposal will only be done to help the left-wing parties where activity is an issue, if the Prime Minister is suggesting lowering voting requirements to 50% when adding an extra 10 MPs that is a serious sign of terminal activity crises in the party.
    I have to be in agreement. It should be kept at 70% at the lowest in my opinion. I believe the Liberals could fill one or two more seats. It seems UKIP and the Conservatives can, as well as the Socialists. There are also the National Liberals to take into account. There is no reason in my eyes to vote Nay to this amendment.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I have to be in agreement. It should be kept at 70% at the lowest in my opinion. I believe the Liberals could fill one or two more seats. It seems UKIP and the Conservatives can, as well as the Socialists. There are also the National Liberals to take into account. There is no reason in my eyes to vote Nay to this amendment.
    I do think that once you raise the voting percentage to a certain level, it hinders rather than helps the level of activity, as people who might be active some of the time but take time away just decide to not get involved or to leave. Parties should be able to self-police turnout to some extent as if their MPs aren't voting they won't win votes.

    If by doing this we want to open the MHoC out to more people and make it more inclusive, then we should reduce the requirement that everyone is active all of the time.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I agree, this house has grown a lot and the MPs seats should grow in line with this.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I think there should be a Vote of No Confidence if an MP does not debate very much. This would allow those who do debate a lot but who are not MPs to have a chance on the green benches.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I think there should be a Vote of No Confidence if an MP does not debate very much. This would allow those who do debate a lot but who are not MPs to have a chance on the green benches.
    Define 'don't debate much'
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think we can justify this increase in numbers considering our VERY recent drop in activity.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LovepreetDhillon)
    I agree, this house has grown a lot and the MPs seats should grow in line with this.
    has it?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    yeah but i don't see why it's such a big deal. slap on he wrist sure, permaban what?
    As I recall it was only a 6 month ban

    (Original post by Aph)
    I would suggest a macau D'Hondt. If we had this with that last election the house would be:

    Lab: 11
    Con: 11
    Lib: 10
    Kip: 10
    Grn: 9
    Soc: 9

    Although the greens ans socs might struggle with 8 seats everyone else would be fine.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Why even bother, why not just say "we'll split the seats equally between all parties" if you're going to do that.

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

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    As I recall it was only a 6 month ban



    Why even bother, why not just say "we'll split the seats equally between all parties" if you're going to do that.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I didn't know that was going to happen before I suggested it. Though it is basically 'everyone gets 10 seats' I admit.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    I do think that once you raise the voting percentage to a certain level, it hinders rather than helps the level of activity, as people who might be active some of the time but take time away just decide to not get involved or to leave. Parties should be able to self-police turnout to some extent as if their MPs aren't voting they won't win votes.

    If by doing this we want to open the MHoC out to more people and make it more inclusive, then we should reduce the requirement that everyone is active all of the time.
    I'd be open to a decrease if 70% proves to hinder rather than help levels of activity. 70% isn't a particularly high percentage to hit.

    However, I do also see your point, as it is only the party itself that is punished if their MPs aren't voting.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    I didn't know that was going to happen before I suggested it. Though it is basically 'everyone gets 10 seats' I admit.
    It should be pretty clear though that given so many seats there will be little disparity, given each seat is about twice as hard as the last to get

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

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    It should be pretty clear though that given so many seats there will be little disparity, given each seat is about twice as hard as the last to get

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yes, but it very much depends on the proportionality because someone winning 50% of the vote would have. Done much better then someone winning just 5%
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    I don't think we can justify this increase in numbers considering our VERY recent drop in activity.
    Have I missed something?
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Have I missed something?
    Just before the MONC was announced and the CC was submitted. there were several days of tumbleweeds in the House.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Just before the MONC was announced and the CC was submitted. there were several days of tumbleweeds in the House.
    Maybe everything is perfect in our model universe?
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Aye, I am confident UKIP would fill extra MP seats, the Liberals have boasted the Liberals have to possibility to fill more seats, and I have it on good word the Conservatives can. Rejecting this proposal will only be done to help the left-wing parties where activity is an issue, if the Prime Minister is suggesting lowering voting requirements to 50% when adding an extra 10 MPs that is a serious sign of terminal activity crises in the party.
    Can I put it on record that, as the person responsible for keeping Labour voting turnout high, I don't agree with his view. If anything we need to increase voting requirements.


    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    If it's not a perma I personally would be happy to have her in the socialists but would obviously have to check with other party members first.
    Saoirse got her TSR ban overturned ages ago. There's a good chance she's reading this thread.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Can I put it on record that, as the person responsible for keeping Labour voting turnout high, I don't agree with his view. If anything we need to increase voting requirements.



    Saoirse got her TSR ban overturned ages ago. There's a good chance she's reading this thread.
    I support increase MPs seats to 60, introducing more requirements on the Speaker to have voting reviews, and increasing the threshold to 80% before a by-election is triggered.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    No! Are you being serious?

    AT LEAST HALF OF THE HOUSE/MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT IS ****ING INACTIVE!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    yeah but i don't see why it's such a big deal. slap on he wrist sure, permaban what?
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    If it's not a perma I personally would be happy to have her in the socialists but would obviously have to check with other party members first.
    I thought the wet dream of socialism doesn't allow cheaters who misuse the system for their own advantage so I'm quite surprised you're fine with it. It wasn't even brief cheating of a bored no-lifer like in the case of JPKC but a deliberate and lengthy attempt to influence two rather important parties and gain considerable advantages over the opponents, i.e. us when it was able to negotiate this government with Liberals while knowing their reactions first-hand!

    If you allow the cheater to join your party, I will urge the House to condemn you on moral grounds.
 
 
 
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: March 7, 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
    Are unpaid trial work shifts fair?
  • 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.