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

A147 – By-Election Duration Amendment (Second Reading) Watch

    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    A147 – By-Election Duration Amendment (Second Reading)
    Proposed by: Unown Uzer MP (UKIP)
    Seconded by: EricAteYou MP (Lab), hazzer1998 MP (UKIP), mobbsy91 MP (Con), Quamquam123 MP (Lab)

    By-election Duration Amendment

    This House shall adjust the Guidance Document as follows:
    1.2.14 of the Guidance Document shall be amended to read:
    The duration of an election shall be 7 days.

    Day 0 – Election is announced by The Speaker.
    Day 0 - The Speaker will inform interested candidates/parties to submit their manifestos
    Day 3 – All manifestos should have been received by The Speaker.
    Day 3 - The Speaker will post the manifestos in a thread in the Model House of Commons forum, add a secret 4 day poll with the option of “Spoilt Ballot”.
    Day 7 – The election closes and seats are assigned.

    Notes:
    At the moment, a seat is left vacant for a very long time due to the long duration of the by-election. This amendment helps get an MP elected faster, which helps with the MHoC's activity.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Aye
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.

    It's not fair on the MHOC that a seat is left vacant for such a long time. This decreases efficiency.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Aye
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. Having 49 instead of 50 MPs isn't a big deal, and this leaves too short a time for parties to be able to undertake internal processes.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I can see why on paper this is a good idea, but I don't think the current system needs fixing having thought about it
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    As a former party leader, I've got to say this seems like a really bad idea. In terms of by-election preparation, I'd ideally want to arrange for a mass PM to notify members who may wish to run, run an internal election, possibly dupe-check the winner if they were admitted at a time when they may not have been, get their input on a manifesto, agree the content with the party, and write it up or make an image file for submission. Within seven days, that's achievable. Three days? Not a hope. This will result in established members running on standard party manifestos and reduce oppourtunities for newer members and the expression of a candidate's individualism.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    Nay for pretty much the reasons that Saoirse set out above.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    To clarify my comment I can see why on paper the quicker the process the better, but democracy shouldn't be rushed, and this is all that this amendment will cause, a rush of democracy
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    As a former party leader, I've got to say this seems like a really bad idea. In terms of by-election preparation, I'd ideally want to arrange for a mass PM to notify members who may wish to run, run an internal election, possibly dupe-check the winner if they were admitted at a time when they may not have been, get their input on a manifesto, agree the content with the party, and write it up or make an image file for submission. Within seven days, that's achievable. Three days? Not a hope. This will result in established members running on standard party manifestos and reduce oppourtunities for newer members and the expression of a candidate's individualism.
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Nay for pretty much the reasons that Saoirse set out above.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Will you support it if I reverted it back to its original version?
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    Will you support it if I reverted it back to its original version?
    Maybe.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Aye, members complaining about not having enough time to write a manifesto are incompetent because three days is long enough to do all of the things S describes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Aye, members complaining about not having enough time to write a manifesto are incompetent because three days is long enough to do all of the things S describes.
    For a start I'd have to start the internal election on Day 1. That means anyone who happens not to log on for 24 hours misses out. Anyone who happens not to log on for 48 hours loses their vote, because I'd only have a single day to run said election. And if an unknown candidate were to win on a low turn-out, you're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the CT will reliably run a dupe check that quickly. If this passes then I believe parties would abandon internal democracy for candidate selection and leave it up to the leadership which would be a backwards step.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    For a start I'd have to start the internal election on Day 1. That means anyone who happens not to log on for 24 hours misses out. Anyone who happens not to log on for 48 hours loses their vote, because I'd only have a single day to run said election. And if an unknown candidate were to win on a low turn-out, you're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the CT will reliably run a dupe check that quickly. If this passes then I believe parties would abandon internal democracy for candidate selection and leave it up to the leadership which would be a backwards step.
    When the by-election is announced the party leader can instantly send a message to all members of the party informing members of the by-election. All members who wish to stand can be asked to create a manifesto in two days, to stand in an internal poll on the last day which last day. Any member who is not online in 24 hours to see the notification is not active enough to be an MP, any member who cannot manage to draw up a manifesto in two day is not capable of being an MP, and complaining about dupe checks is not valid because dupe checks should be conducted when a user applies to join the party, before the user has has their application to join the party approved.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    When the by-election is announced the party leader can instantly send a message to all members of the party informing members of the by-election. All members who wish to stand can be asked to create a manifesto in two days, to stand in an internal poll on the last day which last day. Any member who is not online in 24 hours to see the notification is not active enough to be an MP, any member who cannot manage to draw up a manifesto in two day is not capable of being an MP, and complaining about dupe checks is not valid because dupe checks should be conducted when a user applies to join the party, before the user has has their application to join the party approved.
    An MP can make all the votes and debates if they come online at least once every three days. We have these voting periods for a reason. The internal manifesto is not always the same as what the party will submit for the wider by-election - it's stupid to insist on it being the same when you're trying to appeal to all voters rather than just party members. And on dupe checks, you're incredibly naive. I think by now parties recognise the importance of them, but there's still going to be members around from years gone by who never were. Do you actually want to catch the next Green_Pink, or leave them to it becuase you're rushing every process for no tangible benefit at all?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    As a former party leader, I've got to say this seems like a really bad idea. In terms of by-election preparation, I'd ideally want to arrange for a mass PM to notify members who may wish to run, run an internal election, possibly dupe-check the winner if they were admitted at a time when they may not have been, get their input on a manifesto, agree the content with the party, and write it up or make an image file for submission. Within seven days, that's achievable. Three days? Not a hope. This will result in established members running on standard party manifestos and reduce oppourtunities for newer members and the expression of a candidate's individualism.
    But then you should be running a reveiw of all highlighted seats/have a member ready to stand at all times to be ready... It's not that hard.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    An MP can make all the votes and debates if they come online at least once every three days. We have these voting periods for a reason. The internal manifesto is not always the same as what the party will submit for the wider by-election - it's stupid to insist on it being the same when you're trying to appeal to all voters rather than just party members. And on dupe checks, you're incredibly naive. I think by now parties recognise the importance of them, but there's still going to be members around from years gone by who never were. Do you actually want to catch the next Green_Pink, or leave them to it becuase you're rushing every process for no tangible benefit at all?
    An MP can make the votes but an MP should be committed to debating on bill for more than a day because debate runs over a week. Dupe checks should be carried out before a user joins the party, if a user is checked before joining the party there does not need to be more dupe checks when that user stands to be a candidate in a by-election. The MHoC should work on trust, there are some members whose unscrupulous doings lead to sanctions, but most parties are not desperate enough to fill MPs seats to want to have unscrupulous, lying members as MPs again.

    I am surprised, I can say here I agree with you Aph, you are right, parties should have a long-term plan.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    An MP can make all the votes and debates if they come online at least once every three days. We have these voting periods for a reason. The internal manifesto is not always the same as what the party will submit for the wider by-election - it's stupid to insist on it being the same when you're trying to appeal to all voters rather than just party members. And on dupe checks, you're incredibly naive. I think by now parties recognise the importance of them, but there's still going to be members around from years gone by who never were. Do you actually want to catch the next Green_Pink, or leave them to it becuase you're rushing every process for no tangible benefit at all?
    It's up to parties to defend its borders and control who comes in. It's also up to them to try to weed out those who do not have the best interests of the party in mind. But then of course, it's no surprise that leftists don't do the aforementioned things.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    This amendment has gone to a third reading.
 
 
 
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: August 5, 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
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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.