VA140 – Independent Groupings Amendment Watch

Poll: Should this amendment be passed into the Constitution and Guidance Document?
As many are of the opinion, Aye (18)
40%
On the contrary, No (24)
53.33%
Abstain (3)
6.67%
This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
VA140 – Independent Groupings Amendment
Proposed by: The Hon. Adam9317 MP (UKIP)
Seconded by: The Rt. Hon. PetrosAC MP (Liberal) The Hon. Hazzer1998 The Rt. Hon Airmed MP (Liberal) The Hon. Nebelbon MP (UKIP) The Hon. DMcGovern MP (Socialist) The Hon. Andy98 MP (Green)


Under “Parties” in the Constitution, the following will be added:
5.4 Independent Groupings/ Alliances, as referred to in the guidance document have all the same powers and rights as a regular party, except
5.4.1 Only 3 members are required to create one
5.4.2 No sub forum is permitted for an Independent Grouping
5.4.3 Independent Groupings/Alliances shall not be referred to as a ‘party’ rather an ‘Independent Grouping’ or an ‘Independent Alliance’

Under “Procedures - Party Formation” in the Guidance Document, the following will be added:
4. An Independent Grouping/Alliance requires at least 3 members to create, one of which must be a sitting, or previous MP
4.1 Independent Groupings shall have all the same recognition as a party, except
4.1.1 No sub forum is permitted for an Independent Grouping
4.1.2 Independent Groupings/Alliances shall not be referred to as a ‘party’ rather an ‘Independent Grouping’ or an ‘Independent Alliance’

Section 5 of the Constitution will be renamed from “Parties” to “Parties and Independent Groupings”.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
What was the point in sending this to division, i doubt you'll hit a majority in favour, let alone a supermajority. Supermajority against perhaps.
0
GaelicBolshevik
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
Yeah why not - it might increase participation.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
(Original post by DMcGovern)
Yeah why not - it might increase participation.
How? I see no mechanism whereby it reasonably would

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
No for reasons already stated.
0
toronto353
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
No, it adds a level of complexity to the House that isn't needed (and see how the other place is failing for this reason). In addition, if members want to work together, they can do already, why give it a fancy title?
0
GaelicBolshevik
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
How? I see no mechanism whereby it reasonably would

Posted from TSR Mobile
Well it'd have been easier to set up the Nat Libs and then easier to dismiss them etc. and provide more options for voters, which could then lead to an increase in membership which could lead to a new party.

Or summat like that
1
TheDefiniteArticle
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
Nay, I see nothing which is to be gained.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
(Original post by DMcGovern)
Well it'd have been easier to set up the Nat Libs and then easier to dismiss them etc. and provide more options for voters, which could then lead to an increase in membership which could lead to a new party.

Or summat like that
Or, in reality, nothing changes and we have a few lines added to an already too long constitution for the sake of it.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
GaelicBolshevik
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Or, in reality, nothing changes and we have a few lines added to an already too long constitution for the sake of it.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Yeah, maybe. It's not like we have to read it every day or summat
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
(Original post by DMcGovern)
Yeah, maybe. It's not like we have to read it every day or summat
It does make it codification for the sake of codification on almost certainly purely academic grounds; you not frequently reading something does not mean thinfs should be added to it merely for the sake of adding to it.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
After thought I decided to vote against, as when I was an independent I had no wish to join a group, even though I was in essence representing the ideas of a party that did not exist in TSR land.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#13
Ayes to the right: 18
Noes to the left: 24
Abstentions: 3

The Noes have it! The Noes have it! Unlock!

Turnout: 90%
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

How did your Edexcel GCSE Maths Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - feeling positive (515)
26.28%
The paper was reasonable (855)
43.62%
Not feeling great about that exam (382)
19.49%
It was TERRIBLE (208)
10.61%

Watched Threads

View All