Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    A204 – MP Seat Changes Amendment 2017
    Proposed by: Saracen's Fez MP (Lab)
    Seconded by: Airmed MP (Lib), Bubs051213 MP (Lab), Kalail MP (Lab), LifeIsFine MP (Lib)


    This House would amend the Guidance Document as follows:

    Remove the following from the section 'MP Seat Allocation':

    4) MPs are not allowed to switch from one seat number to another seat number unless;
    a. a period of four weeks has passed
    b. the member is a proxy MP who has not been an MP for more than four consecutive weeks before becoming a proxy MP, unless a period of four weeks has passed since last serving as an MP for four consecutive weeks. For the purposes of this bill the election period does not count towards those four weeks of not being an MP.


    Notes / Rationale
    This is being proposed through a combination of practicality and principle. First of all it is almost incomprehensible in the way it is written, and even when it is read closely the intentions are not entirely clear. We should hold the GD to a higher standard of clarity than this. Secondly parties should have the freedom to appoint whom they wish to their MP seats without the creation of bizarre barriers to doing this. The risk of losing influence in the Division Lobby should act as a sufficient deterrent to maintaining MPs in place who fail to vote.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Abstain.

    This allows parties to move inactive members around, saving their seats.

    The given restrictions are too messy though.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Absolutely not
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Aye
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    From my point of view i do see value in 4a because i think that it encourages leaders to place active MP's in seats rather than jump them around and end up with maybe a bunch of seats on 74% in a game of tactical maneuvering to avoid seat losses.

    Although i do have the same issues with proxies per say there are a whole host of additional issues which need dealing with as part of a platform of proxy members and some of these would render the current incarnation of 4b a bit pointless.

    The section however does need revamping and expanding to provide greater clarity. An example i raised elsewhere is technically it means that a party who gives a seat to a new MP and puts say Ray up as the by-election candidate would technically be invalid unless he'd not been an MP for 4 weeks before (and due to 4a he'd have to wait another 4 weeks if he lost, a total of 8 weeks).

    Despite a general belief in party liberty In the amendments current form i would suggest that members vote Abstain or Nay subject to revision.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Abstain. Like all the nayers and abstainers above.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    abstain
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Abstain

    The current guidance certainly does not provide much clarity however I do believe there is value in having some form of guidance on seat allocations. Whilst I would probably vote aye to seeing this guidance removed as it is currently set out, I do believe such an amendment should make provision for new guidance with greater clarity, which this does not.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Opinions on replacing the section with a straight ban on a permanent MP moving directly from one seat number to another? Would this quell most people's concerns?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Opinions on replacing the section with a straight ban on a permanent MP moving directly from one seat number to another? Would this quell most people's concerns?
    With a time limit, so basically removing section b, then I’d abstain.
    I see the confusion and merit I;section b.
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Opinions on replacing the section with a straight ban on a permanent MP moving directly from one seat number to another? Would this quell most people's concerns?
    That would be tougher than now (not that i'm opposed to the idea) but so long as you keep 4a or that variation of it i think many would support it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Opinions on replacing the section with a straight ban on a permanent MP moving directly from one seat number to another? Would this quell most people's concerns?
    Sounds sensible to me.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    That would be tougher than now (not that i'm opposed to the idea) but so long as you keep 4a or that variation of it i think many would support it.
    No, it's less tough than now as the four-week restriction (which seems excessive – a month can be a long time in MHoC politics) would go, and the restriction would just be on moving someone directly from one seat to another (which can only really be for voting percentage reasons).
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    No, it's less tough than now as the four-week restriction (which seems excessive – a month can be a long time in MHoC politics) would go, and the restriction would just be on moving someone directly from one seat to another (which can only really be for voting percentage reasons).
    Define directly, can I remove someone and then put them in a new seat after an hour?
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    No, it's less tough than now as the four-week restriction (which seems excessive – a month can be a long time in MHoC politics) would go, and the restriction would just be on moving someone directly from one seat to another (which can only really be for voting percentage reasons).
    Do you mean consecutively rather than directly in this context (i.e. seat 1 to 2 to 3).
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Define directly, can I remove someone and then put them in a new seat after an hour?
    OK, there's a case to be made for only one change per seat per day.

    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Do you mean consecutively rather than directly in this context (i.e. seat 1 to 2 to 3).
    No, from any one of a party's seats to different one. So if for example, hypothetically, I were to VoNC the holder of seat 12 due to low turnout, I couldn't move myself over to that seat (so as to ensure it had a reliable voter) and appoint a new MP to seat 8 instead.

    Basically it would mean pretty much free rein for parties to appoint whom they like when they like (as ought to be the case IMO), except with a ban on two MPs swapping seat numbers, or an MP changing seat number mid-service.

    If, to go back to your previous example, I were to appoint a new MP to seat 7, to allow Ray to stand in the by-election, then provided the change took place before voting began, Ray could take up the new seat were he to win, as the intervening days of the by-election would mean the seat change were not immediate.
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    This amendment has entered cessation.
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    This amendment has gone to second 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: October 21, 2017
  • 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
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • 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.