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

A164 – Crisis Committee Amendment Watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    A164 – Crisis Committee Amendment
    Proposed by: Nigel Farage MEP MP (UKIP)
    Seconded by: adam9317 MP (Con), Jammy Duel MP (Con), mobbsy91 MP (Con), Unown Uzer MP (UKIP)

    Amendment to the Constitution

    Section 13 Crisis Committee will be removed from the Constitution.

    Amendment to the Guidance Document

    Section 16 Crisis Committee will be removed from the Guidance Document.

    Notes


    When this amendment was first published members used the argument the Crisis Committee should be given one chance, or its existence is fine because the Crisis Committee is not detracting from the game, however, things have changed. The Crisis Committee has been given a final chance but the Crisis Committee failed by not publishing a sensible crisis.

    If the Crisis Committee should be allowed to sit idle for a small group of members to enjoy, the National Liberal Party should have been allowed to sit idle. If the National Liberal Party was rightly closed for inactivity, the Crisis Committee should be closed for its inactivity by failing to produce a reasonable crisis.

    The biased Speaker give the Crisis Committee a new chance after the second amendment failed, however, that chance was squandered on silly crises about the Prime Minister's rectum. The most active members in the MHoC are not drawn to the Crisis Committee, the members in the Crisis Committee are smaller members who do not contribute much, they are the members who are not highly active, struggle to debate, and promise so much but deliver nothing. Time is up, the Crisis Committee needs to close to put a rest to a failed idea no members are interested in.


    Speaker's note: Yes, I'm aware we've had one of these already this term, but the final paragraph of notes (whilst I must object to the accusations of bias) is for me a sufficiently compelling argument to allow the House to consider this matter again.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    No. I am very disappointed that the Speaker allowed this amendment to be submitted this term. By putting this amendment in the House, the Speaker is setting a dangerous precedent for the future as it will show other members that they can submit essentially the same amendment again and again until it passes. Earlier in the term I wanted to submit an amendment to the Speaker on a certain topic, oblivious to the fact that an amendment on that topic had already been proposed in this term. The Speaker told me ‘I think in the interests of general good order in the House it is best that I do not take another amendment like this during the current term unless its provisions are significantly different to the ones in the previous amendment.’ I accepted that and got rid of the amendment. However, Fez is now allowing an almost identical to another one which was submitted just a few months ago. This is gross inconsistency and because of this, I would urge you all to not vote on this amendment. This amendment should be delayed until next term.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    The Crisis Committee is an irrelevance and the subforum should be closed. Any crises can still be planned and discussed within the main forum if people want to take part.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    ffs i mean we were just finalising a crisis. You could at least wait until next term.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    And this is an example of what I would class as a good amendment - clear, to the point, and aimed at making the House as simple as possible. An aye from me.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Aye
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Appears that not only is the CC incapable of coming out with anything sensible, but it sounds like the chair is once again going to abuse their powers to in effect make their crises automatically passed.

    Regardless, I suggest that anybody that still supports the CC has their head looked at because it is chronically failing to do its job.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Aye. The members are either too unenthusiastic or too biased.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Mr Speaker, could you clarify whether this Amendment, or something substantially the same, has already been proposed this term? (tbh I've had a few and cba checking)

    If it has been, then nay, and I would like to withdraw my seconding on principle. Otherwise aye.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Mr Speaker, could you clarify whether this Amendment, or something substantially the same, has already been proposed this term? (tbh I've had a few and cba checking)

    If it has been, then nay, and I would like to withdraw my seconding on principle. Otherwise aye.
    Yes, A154 was an identical amendment. I have given my justification for allowing the resubmission, but since your withdrawal leaves the amendment without sufficient seconders, debate on this will be suspended unless and until a replacement seconder can be found.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Jammy Duel has agreed to second this amendment and so debate may continue.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Aye. As the creator of the CC, I honestly think it's time to shut it down. It could have been great but not enough people have the time or effort to propose anything genuinely good.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Mr Speaker, could you clarify whether this Amendment, or something substantially the same, has already been proposed this term? (tbh I've had a few and cba checking)

    If it has been, then nay, and I would like to withdraw my seconding on principle. Otherwise aye.
    There was an almost identical amendment a few months ago. Therefore, this should be treated as an illegitimate amendment.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    There was an almost identical amendment a few months ago. Therefore, this should be treated as an illegitimate amendment.
    So are you actually going to bother defending the CC or not?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    If I had a vote I would vote aye, the CC should have been closed months ago.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I would vote aye, but I agree with Quamquam

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    So are you actually going to bother defending the CC or not?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I don't feel the need to discuss the content of this amendment because quite frankly, the Speaker shouldn't have accepted it. I wouldn't complain one bit if this amendment was presented to the House on the first day of next term, which is just a few weeks away.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Aye, as i do not and have never taken part, and do not think it adds much.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Those saying it should wait a month until the next term are literally doing nothing other than making it come up yet again

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Those saying it should wait a month until the next term are literally doing nothing other than making it come up yet again

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    No. The fact is that this amendment should not have been put before the House in the first place. If the Speaker is going to be consistent and protect the interests of the MHoC, he should withdraw this amendment and put it up at the beginning of next term.
 
 
 
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: October 17, 2016
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

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.