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

MHoC By-election March 2016: VOTE HERE! Watch

  • View Poll Results: Who do you wish to elect as an MP to the TSR Model House of Commons?
    "The Financier" (endorsed by the TSR Conservative and Unionist Party)
    27
    33.75%
    "Hydeman" (endorsed by the TSR National Liberal Party)
    15
    18.75%
    "JoeL1994" (Independant)
    15
    18.75%
    "Gladiator12345" (endorsed by the TSR Socialist Party)
    21
    26.25%
    Spoilt Ballot
    2
    2.50%

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I'm not so much fussed about the first bit but I completely agree with the bit in bold.
    If that's an issue with our candidate, who has the excuse of only recently joining, then what is the excuse for the Nat Libs, who kicked up such a fuss about making a party and since then have shown no significant activity, leaving most of its party unknown apart from noble chance?



    DRINK!!
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    That's completely different from campaigning via PM. We've had many members of parties changing their signatures during general elections so there's even a strong precedent for it.
    The case against this is far far stronger than yours against us since the substantive effect is the same as something actually outruled. Has anyone actually challenged the use of signatures in GEs? I reckon that shouldn't be allowed either, and if it's never been challenged, the precedent is irrelevant.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by nebelbon)
    Some very good candidates here! I'd genuinely be pleased to see any of the candidates to win the seats.

    Although there is a distinct lack of purple...
    You're wrong.....The Financier's running and he's purple
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Peer Support Volunteers
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    At least I'm getting shite done!
    When you retire, you should become a MHoC detective.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Labour hasn't submitted a candidate because we had assumed we would be able to stand someone, but at the last minute they expressed their opinion that now wasn't the right time for them to become an MP and we were unable to find someone else in time.
    Ah I see. It's a shame but that's fair enough.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    The case against this is far far stronger than yours against us since the substantive effect is the same as something actually outruled. Has anyone actually challenged the use of signatures in GEs? I reckon that shouldn't be allowed either, and if it's never been challenged, the precedent is irrelevant.
    Well, I was considering the usual MHoC interpretation of precedent—previous Speakers didn't mind so nothing can be done.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    Well, for one thing, we don't have any MPs (and my candidacy in this by-election hopes to rectify that), so that limits what we can do legislatively.
    That's no excuse when you have 2 MPs as dual members of your party. Lime-man manages to get bills before the House, it's just a matter of acquiring seconders.


    (Original post by Hydeman)

    For another, both myself and ANC, the leader, have been quite busy in real life -- ANC has actually moved country, if I recall correctly. It also took a while for us to get the party sub-forum sorted (it was initially open for all to see and post in), and there's only so much to be done via PMs given the aforementioned personal circumstances.
    Fair enough, but the rest of us have significant rl commitments - some are even in full-time employment and manage to take part in debates - and you're not the only two members of your party.


    (Original post by Hydeman)
    We're as disappointed as you that we haven't managed to get as much done as we'd promised, but we should hopefully be stepping up (well, maybe with a little dip around exam season) to the plate now.
    This has been said a couple of times without any subsequent appreciation in activity. Let's hope it's different this time around.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Well, I was considering the usual MHoC interpretation of precedent—previous Speakers didn't mind so nothing can be done.
    Please link me to a comment of a previous Speaker which confirms this. Passive acquiescence is insufficient.

    Edit: in any event, I suggest that he get rid of it from his signature for now; if it is kept it will be legitimate to seek disqualification IMO.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I reject the argument about not having MPs restricting you legislatively. You have two Duel members that are both MPs that can second legislation for you.
    Context matters, my dear Petros.

    With the party leadership absent, and the two MPs in question being generally more devoted to their first party (that would be your party in Airmed's case -- she joined as a sort of 'I'll help you out because you're new' gesture, if I remember rightly), it's not entirely unreasonable that we didn't have any real legislative influence to speak of. It might superficially seem that having two dual members who are MPs means that there's no excuse for legislative inactivity but, as I say, context matters.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by The Financier)
    Ah I see. It's a shame but that's fair enough.
    Periods without available non-MPs are unfortunately what comes of having 14 seats.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Airmed)
    Your art skills are amazing, deadly.
    We've had an internal discussion and resolved this issue of inactivity - this was a beginner's insecurity in being introduced to the MHoC rather than a display of laziness. I know myself that when I first started in the MHoC I was quite stunned by its magnitude and intricate workings; as well as partly the level of activity demanded.

    I think the real reason for this is that Life peer is worried that since the Socs are running a candidate and Labour aren't, we might get the majority vote from the left and win a seat.


    DRINK!!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Please link me to a comment of a previous Speaker which confirms this. Passive acquiescence is insufficient.
    CBA, sorry. Someone with better episodic memory might be able to help, though. I just know it's been common practice for years.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by toronto353)
    you're wrong.....the financier's running and he's purple
    shots fired , shots fired
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Peer Support Volunteers
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    Context matters, my dear Petros.

    With the party leadership absent, and the two MPs in question being generally more devoted to their first party (that would be your party in Airmed's case -- she joined as a sort of 'I'll help you out because you're new' gesture, if I remember rightly), it's not entirely unreasonable that we didn't have any real legislative influence to speak of. It might superficially seem that having two dual members who are MPs means that there's no excuse for legislative inactivity but, as I say, context matters.
    I did. I do agree with Nat Lib policy but I'm DL of the Liberals. They do come first. I'll try and put more time in now though for both parties.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    Seeing as we're not standing a candidate......

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    Context matters, my dear Petros.

    With the party leadership absent, and the two MPs in question being generally more devoted to their first party (that would be your party in Airmed's case -- she joined as a sort of 'I'll help you out because you're new' gesture, if I remember rightly), it's not entirely unreasonable that we didn't have any real legislative influence to speak of. It might superficially seem that having two dual members who are MPs means that there's no excuse for legislative inactivity but, as I say, context matters.
    I disagree. All you have to do is take one of the things you pledged when you guys were formed and write a bill or even just a motion on it. Airmed and nebelbon can help you guys with formatting and then second it.

    On Leadership - If they're inactive, get rid of them.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    That's no excuse when you have 2 MPs as dual members of your party. Lime-man manages to get bills before the House, it's just a matter of acquiring seconders.
    See my reply to Petros.

    Fair enough, but the rest of us have significant rl commitments - some are even in full-time employment and manage to take part in debates - and you're not the only two members of your party.
    This is a fair criticism, so my apologies.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Peer Support Volunteers
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    We've had an internal discussion and resolved this issue of inactivity - this was a beginner's insecurity in being introduced to the MHoC rather than a display of laziness. I know myself that when I first started in the MHoC I was quite stunned by its magnitude and intricate workings; as well as partly the level of activity demanded.

    I think the real reason for this is that Life peer is worried that since the Socs are running a candidate and Labour aren't, we might get the majority vote from the left and win a seat.
    I was really commenting on the paint skills. The *clap*...I can't stop laughing. :laugh:

    But faur enough, thanks for an explanation.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Please link me to a comment of a previous Speaker which confirms this. Passive acquiescence is insufficient.

    Edit: in any event, I suggest that he get rid of it from his signature for now; if it is kept it will be legitimate to seek disqualification IMO.
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    CBA, sorry. Someone with better episodic memory might be able to help, though. I just know it's been common practice for years.
    Not too many previous Speakers walking about these days but if you'd like the opinion of a current Speaker I have no problem with The Financier's signature.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by hazzer1998)
    shots fired , shots fired
    Bring it!
 
 
 
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 29, 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
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • 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.