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

B1046 – Privatisation of Vermin Bill 2016 Watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    B1046 – Privatisation of Vermin Bill 2016, TSR Socialist Party

    Privatisation of Vermin Bill 2016

    A Bill to privatise the Queen's vermin in order to encourage their economic activity and efficiency.

    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

    1: Definitions
    (1) 'Vermin' shall refer to the species Cygnus Olor, also known as the mute swan.
    (2) 'A fair maiden born on these great isles who has never had any involvement in the sex industry whatsoever and nobody would ever dare to suggest such a vile thing' shall refer to the reigning monarch.

    2: Ownership
    (1) [A fair maiden born on these great isles who has never had any involvement in the sex industry whatsoever and nobody would ever dare to suggest such a vile thing]'s right of ownership of vermin shall cease.
    (2) Right of ownership shall return to the government.

    3: Tendering Process
    (1) The Secretary of State shall appoint a Minister for Vermin.
    (2) The Minister for Vermin shall:
    (2)(a) maintain a list estuaries which contain vermin.
    (2)(b) create a franchise for each relevant estuary, where the owner of a franchise is entitled to:
    (2)(b)(i) use the vermin as they deem fit, subject to legality, whether that be to generate profit or otherwise.
    (2)(b)(ii) the revenues of all economic activity relating to the vermin.
    (2)(c) invite interested parties to submit a tender to own a franchise for a period of time, which is:
    (2)(c)(i) no shorter than five years.
    (2)(c)(ii) no longer than twenty years.
    (2)(d) award each franchise to the bidder they deem to offer the best deal for the state, taking into consideration the following non-exhaustive list of factors:
    (2)(d)(i) the annual fee to be received for the franchise.
    (2)(d)(ii) the one-off fee to be received for the franchise.
    (2)(d)(iii) the economic benefits to the area.
    (2)(d)(iv) the intended use of the vermin.
    (2)(d)(v) the intended cost to the consumer.
    (2)(d)(vi) the plans for investment in the vermin and the estuary.
    (2)(d)(vii) the plans for conservation and breeding to ensure a healthy stock is maintained.

    4: Franchise Failure
    (1) The owner of a franchise is expected to meet the commitments they made when submitting the tender, as outlined in section 3 subsection 2(d).
    (2) The owner of a franchise is expected to follow all laws with regards to their treatment of the vermin and the estuary in which they operate.
    (3) If the Minister for Vermin deems a franchise owner to be failing to meet its commitments and follow the law, he shall issue a warning. Upon a warning being issued, the franchise owner is expected to:
    (3)(a) take steps to rectify the issue within six months.
    (3)(b) pay a fine of 5% on top of their next annual fee.
    (4) If the franchise owner fails to take these steps, their ownership of the franchise will be revoked with no compensation.
    (5) A franchise owner may appeal against a warning or their franchise being revoked within one month of the decision being made. The Secretary of State will hear the appeal with any supporting evidence within a month of the appeal being lodged and either uphold or annul the decision.
    (6) Upon a franchise being revoked, a new tendering process shall begin in accordance with section 3.
    (7) The Minister for Vermin shall take steps to oversee the upkeep of an estuary until the franchise can be awarded to a new tenderer.

    5: Commencement
    (1) This Act may be cited as the Privatisation of Vermin Act 2016.
    (2) This Act shall extend to the United Kingdom and Canada.
    (3) This Act shall come into force sometime next year.

    Notes:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    The monarchy currently has a monopoly on vermin and makes little use of them. By allowing private operators to run estuaries, it will encourage economic activity and efficiency.Potential economic uses include:
    - Selling as food: One swan could feed a family of twenty and would make an excellent Christmas delicacy.
    - Selling feathers: Could be used in garments or for recreational activities such as mocking Native Americans.
    - Tourism: Birdwatchers would travel many hundreds of miles to look at swans in a lake and buy souvenirs in the gift shop.
    - Sports: Swan Fighting could attract thousands of spectators; their wings can do great damage.

    Note on terminology: As names of departments often change, it is convention to simply to refer to the 'Secretary of State' rather than to the SoS of a particular department, hence why it has not been explicitly stated in this bill. At this present time we would expect this to fall under the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, which is fitting considering the current SoS is Andrea Leadsom, who is of course vermin herself.

    Costings: We expect businesses will pay many billions and possibly trillions to own these franchises, so this has the potential to wipe out our national debt. However we can not know for sure until this is passed and the market takes its course. To be on the cautious side, we are going to estimate that this will bring in £107bn per annum.

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Aye, looks solid to me.

    I reckon it would bring more into the economy though per annum?
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Lol
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I would like to apologise for the long-winded definition of the monarch. The initial definition was rejected by the speaker, as can be seen here in the rejected submissions thread, and so we had to retract the offending terms appropriately.

    (Original post by SoggyCabbages)
    Aye, looks solid to me.

    I reckon it would bring more into the economy though per annum?
    Yes, we outlined some of the potential economic benefits in the notes - thank you for the support. In particular I look forward to Swan Fighting replacing Football as our national sport. Swans could also be used in other sports such as Quidditch, where they would act as a bludger (at least until we can have the technology to make drones resilient enough to do the job)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Socialists. You're the vermin.
    Thank you for voicing your concerns, but after conducting a thorough investigation we have concluded that we have no swans in our party.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cBay)
    I would like to apologise for the long-winded definition of the monarch. The initial definition was rejected by the speaker, as can be seen here in the rejected submissions thread, and so we had to retract the offending terms appropriately.
    Lovely standards by the speaker, allowing some awful language in the house but rejects 'German Whore'.



    (Original post by cBay)
    Yes, we outlined some of the potential economic benefits in the notes - thank you for the support. In particular I look forward to Swan Fighting replacing Football as our national sport. Swans could also be used in other sports such as Quidditch, where they would act as a bludger (at least until we can have the technology to make drones resilient enough to do the job)
    If you slightly melt a swan you can mould it into a Rugby ball. Then they can be used for Rugby.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cBay)
    Thank you for voicing your concerns, but after conducting a thorough investigation we have concluded that we have no swans in our party.
    I was referring to the previous version of this bill.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SoggyCabbages)
    Lovely standards by the speaker, allowing some awful language in the house but rejects 'German Whore'.
    For the record, he also rejected 'shape-shifting reptilian humanoid' and 'Deutsch Hure'. The problem appears to not be with profanity, but with making an accusation against a person without substantiated evidence. I considered making the point that to label it as an accusation is to insinuate that there is something bad about being a whore, which whores could find offensive. However I decided not to fight him any further on the issue.


    If you slightly melt a swan you can mould it into a Rugby ball. Then they can be used for Rugby.
    An excellent idea. We don't wish to dictate how the swans are to be used and have only offered suggestions. Ultimately it is up to the market to decide how to make best use of this new resource.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    No true Socialist brother could reject such a beautifully written bill.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cBay)
    For the record, he also rejected 'shape-shifting reptilian humanoid' and 'Deutsch Hure'. The problem appears to not be with profanity, but with making an accusation against a person without substantiated evidence. I considered making the point that to label it as an accusation is to insinuate that there is something bad about being a whore, which whores could find offensive. However I decided not to fight him any further on the issue.
    The grammatical errors in "Deutsch Hure" are also quite disgusting.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    The grammatical errors in "Deutsch Hure" are also quite disgusting.
    I must admit I used google translate. I refuse to learn the language of the foreign imperialists.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Socialists. You're the vermin.
    I thought Nye Bevan had already made clear who the vermin are. Not that I condone such parliamentary language
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I thought Nye Bevan had already made clear who the vermin are. Not that I condone such parliamentary language
    No, no - he made clear who were lower than vermin, but he never actually defined vermin itself.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Oh how I wish we had passed that oath amendment! No, obviously.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Funny.

    Oh wait, no it's not.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    lol

    though seriously, you should write this as an actual Bill, I'm sure swan can taste quite nice.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Socialists. You're the vermin.
    At least we don’t exploit workers whilst simultaneously claiming Capitalism creates everything when it’s acc the labour you exploit

    Aye
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Swans as food? No? Take away something that has been a part of the heritage of the country and the Thames, immortalised by Stanley Spencer in one of his finest paintings? No. The Socialists proposing privatisation- I never thought I'd see the day.

    So Nay.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    Swans as food? No? Take away something that has been a part of the heritage of the country and the Thames, immortalised by Stanley Spencer in one of his finest paintings? No. The Socialists proposing privatisation- I never thought I'd see the day.

    So Nay.
    Do why should swans not be food?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    Swans as food? No? Take away something that has been a part of the heritage of the country and the Thames, immortalised by Stanley Spencer in one of his finest paintings? No. The Socialists proposing privatisation- I never thought I'd see the day.

    So Nay.
    I have to say I thought the Greens would be more enthusiastic about this. Swans as food would have much lower greenhouse emissions than beef, lamb and pork. What's more, they would of course be free range unlike those poor factory farmed chickens.

    They would remain to reside in the estuaries they already reside in - as made clear in Section 3(2)(d)(vii), conservation efforts would be a key factor when the Minister of Vermin is deciding who to award the franchise to. Therefore there is nothing to stop artists continuing to paint swans. Indeed, we highlighted in the notes the potential for tourism as one of the economic uses.

    I find it disappointing that so many conservatives who have commented seem to support continued public ownership, where it is clear that this economic resource is being wasted, rather than allowing market forces to come into play.
 
 
 
Updated: September 21, 2016
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.

Poll
Is GoT overrated?

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.