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

A196 - Constitutional Comittee Amendment Watch

    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    A196 - Constitutional Comittee Amendment
    Proposed by: Hon joecphillips MP (LIBER)
    Seconders: Hon Emily Porter MP (LAB), Hon Unown Uzer MP (UKIP), Hon Connor27 MP (LIBER), Hon LifeIsFine MP (LIB)


    Add to the constitution:

    13. Constitutional Committee

    1) Will be a committee of at least 1 member of each party, exceptions explained in the Guidance Document.
    2) Activity will be organised in accordance with the Guidance Document.

    Add to the Guidance Document

    15. Constitutional committee

    Construction:

    1) The Constitutional Committee will consist of one member from each party in the House of Commons.
    2) Independent MPs are also eligible to sit on the committee, if they wish.
    3) The speaker of the house, will also be a member of the Constitutional Committee

    Responsibilities:

    1) The Constitutional Committee is responsible for the enactment of the TSR House of Commons constitution.
    2) Any action of an MP or political party may be referred to the constitutional committee, for discussion.
    3) It is the committees place to decide whether or not the action is in breach of the constitution
    4) If in breach, the Constitutional Committee will be allowed to implement sanctions against the individual or party involved.
    5) Any decision made by the Constitutional Committee may be overruled by a vote in the House of Commons
    6) The committee may also make recommendations to the House of Commons, on amendments to the constitution

    Enactment of the Constitution:

    1) The Constitutional Committee will meet in a public forum to discuss changes to the constitution and to discuss any alleged unconstitutional activities by MPs or parties.
    a. This can be done in a thread in the House of Commons or a new sub-forum could be created at the discretion of the TSR Moderation Team.
    2) Each member of the Constitutional Committee has one vote on all decisions, and all decisions must be decided by a majority vote
    3) Alleged constitutional breaches will be submitted to the speaker, who will then put the issue to a discussion by the constitutional committee.
    4) After a period of no less than 24 hours, and no more than 96 hours, the issue will be put to a vote to determine whether or not the action was in breach of the constitution
    5) If the action is considered in breach of the constitution, sanctions will be discussed by the Constitutional Committee.
    6) After a period of no less than 24 hours, and no more than 96 hours, possible and alternative sanctions will be put to the vote.
    7) This vote must include the choice to give no sanction, either on the grounds that the breach is too minor to require sanction, or that the breach is due to errors in the constitution
    8) Possible sanctions can be: an informal warning, a formal warning, 4 week suspension of an individual or party from the House of Commons, suspension of an individual or party for the rest of the current session of the House of Commons, permanent banning of an individual from the HoC, removal of seats which will go up for a by-election or calling a general election.
    9) Alternative sanctions can be suggested by any member of the court.
    10) Three formal warnings in a single session of parliament automatically result in a 4 week suspension for an individual or party.
    11) If no action is taken due to errors in the constitution, the Constitutional Committee must submit to the house an amendment within 4 weeks, to resolve the error in the constitution.
    12) The House of Commons may call for a vote on any decision made by the Constitutional Committee, within 14 days, if at least three party members request this, by submitting a PM to the speaker.
    A) This will require a 2/3rds majority to overrule the committee.
    13) If an alternative sanction is enacted then a vote requiring a simple majority will be required to enact the sanctions.
    14) If no vote is called, the sanctions shall be enacted.



    Spoiler:
    Show

    A lot of this is just a copy of A17 but I have changed it slightly.
    • Aston Villa FC Supporter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    So, similar to the EU/NATO in a way :holmes:


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    Good idea in theory but sanctions shouldn't be open to MPs to decide given obvious conflicts of interest. You have a speaker who can rule whether the acts of members are constitutional. You don't need more than necessary. One MP from each party tips the weight towards which ever side has the more active parties.

    No
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I would worry that this would mean a party creating shell indies to control the committee, I agree with the idea but the members should be required to have at least a year of MHoC experience to be appointed.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Definitely not. For a start it sounds too similar to the Crisis Committee in its makeup – and there is nothing wrong with the existing procedures.

    Did we not learn the lesson over these stupid subcommittees when we lumbered ourselves for so long with the useless Crisis Committee?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Definitely not. For a start it sounds too similar to the Crisis Committee in its makeup – and there is nothing wrong with the existing procedures.

    Did we not learn the lesson over these stupid subcommittees when we lumbered ourselves for so long with the useless Crisis Committee?
    The way the CC was set up and it's remit was poor, this would, in theory, be more active.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Nay

    I don't believe a committee is needed this ammendment is simply reducing the speakers powers and has less authority. The speaker job is to make decisions and be free to interpret the constitution. This also takes away active members from the house to stand in the committee and certain MP's may end up controlling and influencing the committee that best represents their party.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    The way the CC was set up and it's remit was poor, this would, in theory, be more active.
    Possibly more active, but inactivity was but one small problem of the CC – the real problem is there was no real place for it or its crises in the MHoC system. I think this is much the same and just as much of a white elephant.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. Introducing partisanship to constitutional interpretation is a recipe for disaster. For the same reason, this gives small parties a disproportionate influence in the House.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Okay so time for a detailed analysis.

    (Original post by Amendment)
    A196 - Constitutional Comittee Amendment
    15. Constitutional committee

    Construction:

    1) The Constitutional Committee will consist of one member from each party in the House of Commons.
    2) Independent MPs are also eligible to sit on the committee, if they wish.
    3) The speaker of the house, will also be a member of the Constitutional Committee
    A196 - Constitutional Comittee Amendment indies shouldn't be allowed on the committee or they, like everyone else should be made to have been an MP for over a year. And the DS should sit too.

    Responsibilities:

    5) Any decision made by the Constitutional Committee may be overruled by a vote in the House of Commons
    6) The committee may also make recommendations to the House of Commons, on amendments to the constitution
    Separation of powers!!!! Parliament should not be the dictator of whether parliament broke the law.
    And (6) is pointless because they can do that anyway... it's called being a member of the house.

    Enactment of the Constitution:

    1) The Constitutional Committee will meet in a public forum to discuss changes to the constitution and to discuss any alleged unconstitutional activities by MPs or parties.
    a. This can be done in a thread in the House of Commons or a new sub-forum could be created at the discretion of the TSR Moderation Team.
    should be a sub-Forum to prevent ambassadors being whipped.

    2) Each member of the Constitutional Committee has one vote on all decisions, and all decisions must be decided by a majority vote
    the speaker, being elected by the house, should get at least 2 votes.

    4) After a period of no less than 24 hours, and no more than 96 hours, the issue will be put to a vote to determine whether or not the action was in breach of the constitution
    who puts it to vote? What kind of poll?
    5) If the action is considered in breach of the constitution, sanctions will be discussed by the Constitutional Committee.
    6) After a period of no less than 24 hours, and no more than 96 hours, possible and alternative sanctions will be put to the vote.
    what kind of vote? Surely if the vote for breachment just passes then the punishment will be 'slap on the wrist'. There should be a clause that breaching parties cannot be their own judge.
    7) This vote must include the choice to give no sanction, either on the grounds that the breach is too minor to require sanction, or that the breach is due to errors in the constitution
    define errors in the constitution?
    8) Possible sanctions can be: an informal warning, a formal warning, 4 week suspension of an individual or party from the House of Commons, suspension of an individual or party for the rest of the current session of the House of Commons, permanent banning of an individual from the HoC, removal of seats which will go up for a by-election or calling a general election.
    banning an individual from the MHoC is a moderation issue not a speakership one. And how is calling a general election ever a proportional action?!
    11) If no action is taken due to errors in the constitution, the Constitutional Committee must submit to the house an amendment within 4 weeks, to resolve the error in the constitution.
    12) The House of Commons may call for a vote on any decision made by the Constitutional Committee, within 14 days, if at least three party members request this, by submitting a PM to the speaker.
    A) This will require a 2/3rds majority to overrule the committee.
    13) If an alternative sanction is enacted then a vote requiring a simple majority will be required to enact the sanctions.
    14) If no vote is called, the sanctions shall be enacted.
    this should all be removed.



    Spoiler:
    Show


    A lot of this is just a copy of A17 but I have changed it slightly.

    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Possibly more active, but inactivity was but one small problem of the CC – the real problem is there was no real place for it or its crises in the MHoC system. I think this is much the same and just as much of a white elephant.
    There was no place for crises in the MHoC, I agree and said that from the get go. I belive there is a place for cross party committees however.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Some honourable members cite the Crisis Committee for a reason not to enact this amendment. But, the Crisis Committee was useless. This Committee has an actual use and takes 'executive' decision on punishments for the breach in the constitution away from the Speaker into a delegation of members of this honourable House.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Definitely not. For a start it sounds too similar to the Crisis Committee in its makeup – and there is nothing wrong with the existing procedures.

    Did we not learn the lesson over these stupid subcommittees when we lumbered ourselves for so long with the useless Crisis Committee?
    This takes over something that is already part of the MHoC and decentralises the power to compare it to the cc is just lazy.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mr T 999)
    Nay

    I don't believe a committee is needed this ammendment is simply reducing the speakers powered and has less authority. The speaker job is to make decisions and be free to interpret the constitution. This also takes away active members from the house to stand in the committee and certain MP's may end up controlling and influencing the committee that best represents their party.
    Is the speaker always right? Why is having more voices involved in the discussion wrong? The DS could influence the speaker and they are in party politics.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Is the speaker always right? Why is having more voices involved in the discussion wrong? The DS could influence the speaker and they are in party politics.

    The speaker may not always be right but that's speakers job to makes decisions and not every decision they make will please members in the house. We don't need a group of people to be involved in speakership business, I believe the speaker and DS are more than capable of carrying out the role. What's needed is to delegate some speakers tasks to the DS, this will reduce the burden of the speaker.

    A party can send a member or group of members to stand as a indie and then enter the committee and could influence the committee decision.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mr T 999)
    The speaker may not always be right but that's speakers job to makes decisions and not every decision they make will please members in the house. We don't need a group of people to be involved in speakership business, I believe the speaker and DS are more than capable of carrying out the role. What's needed is to delegate some speakers tasks to the DS, this will reduce the burden of the speaker.

    A party can send a member or group of members to stand as a indie and then enter the committee and could influence the committee decision.
    It could also cost them seats

    It hasn't always been down to the speaker.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    It could also cost them seats

    It hasn't always been down to the speaker.
    Yes it will cost them their seat in the party but if they win a seat as a indie then entered the committee they would have some influence. This is in fact a loophole In your proposal and could be exploited.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Is the speaker always right? Why is having more voices involved in the discussion wrong? The DS could influence the speaker and they are in party politics.
    Am I going to get a response?
 
 
 
Updated: July 1, 2017
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
How are you feeling about Results Day?

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.