VA159 – Dual Membership Amendment Watch
I don't see why party's should have to cede control of their usergroup to another party. If the Tories were unable to negotiate this with the Liberals then that's their problem.
What do you mean they aren't. This amendment means that a party in coalition has to clear dual memberships with their partners. I think that parties should be able to control who's a member without having to consult another party. Unless the relevant parties agree to consult eachother in a coalition agreement that is.
And if a party believes it's coalition partners will let in spies and dupes or whatever then they should tell their partner(s) that themselves and work it into an agreement. This looks to me like nothing more than the Tories using us to impose something on the Liberals. So whilst I appreciate that it might be a useful arrangement, I don't see why it needs to be enshrined in the Constitution.
Considering the term is almost virtually over, that's a bit of a ridiculous argument... also note that the only Tory who has written support on this amendment is me, the proposer. Other tories i spoke to are less bothered about it.
Noes to the left: 4
The Ayes have it! The Ayes have it! Unlock!