B1372 - Education (Parliamentary Oversight) Bill 2018

Watch
This discussion is closed.
DayneD89
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
What is this?/I'm confused
Hi there. If you're confused as to what is going on here then you are probably new to this section of TSR. This is a Model House of Commons, a forum where we emulate the structure of the Real Life House of Commons as an excuse to debate politics.

If you are seeing this and you want to get involved in the debate, please feel free. You do not need to join a party, get approval or join any group to get stuck in right away. If you enjoy it and you do want to join a party then you can do so here. If you have any questions or need any help please message me. I am the current speaker of the house and part of my role involves offering impartial advice to new members so I will always be happy to answer what questions you have. Alternatively, you can read the new members guide to get advice on a wide range of issues.

Note: Please refrain from making comments about how we spend our free time. It is our free time to spend.


B1372 - Education (Parliamentary Oversight) Bill 2018, TSR Labour Party

Image
Education (Parliamentary Oversight) Bill 2018

An Act to allow both the executive and the legislature to amend certain non-legislative aspects of English education policy.

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most excellent Majesty, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

1: Policy Areas
(1) The following policy areas are covered by the provisions of this Act:
(1) a. The existence, format and content of educational qualifications, and which of these qualifications are made compulsory.
(1) b. The content of the National Curriculum.
(1) c. The design of maintenance and tuition fee loans and grants for students in higher education, but not including changes to the nature or repayment methods of student loan debt.
(2) The procedures set out in this Act may not amend any Act of Parliament already in place.
(3) The list of policy areas in subsection 1(1) may only be amended through the passage of a further Act of Parliament to amend this Act.

2: Oversight
(1) Changes may be made to the policy areas in subsection 1(1), subject to the full provisions set out in section 1, by:
(1) a. the Secretary of State, or
(1) b. the House of Commons, through the successful passage of a motion.

3: Application to the TSR Model House of Commons
(1) All provisions of this Act apply to the TSR Model House of Commons (hereafter 'MHoC'.
(2) Policy changes under this Act within the MHoC must, where relevant, fully observe MHoC procedures governing:
(2) a. the passage of motions by the House of Commons, and
(2) b. the exercise of executive powers by government ministers.

4: Extent, Commencement and Short Title
(1) This Act extends to England.
(2) The provisions of this Act come into force immediately.
(3) This Act may be cited as the Education (Parliamentary Oversight) Act 2018.


Notes
Following the Secretary of State for Education's insufficient response to M481, in which he chose to ignore the full content of the motion, this bill intends to ensure that the whole House, as well as the Secretary of State, has the ability to bindingly amend education policy.

The elements of education policy currently included are the National Curriculum, qualifications, and student finance. These are all matters which are not codified in primary legislation and are currently under the sole control of the executive. Section 2 of this bill allows the whole House the ability to pass a motion which will bindingly change policy. This allows the House a means to oppose inaction by the Secretary of State (there is already arguably a means to oppose action, by voting down an SoI) without the need to introduce bills into an area currently not codified in primary legislation.

Section 3 sets out the means in which this will work specifically within the MHoC, clarifying that the usual motion procedure will apply in full, and the Secretary of State will be required to use the SoI procedure to make changes as usual.

Posted By SpeakerBot
Report an issue | Suggest a feature
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
1.c The design of maintenance and tuition fee loans and grants for students in higher education, but not including changes to the nature or repayment methods of student loan debt.

Would someone mind explaining what falls into the design of, that isn't part of the nature of, student finance...


Beyond that there are far too many ambiguities here. No.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
Also, I disapprove of the use of emojis as part of legislation. I'd let it slide in the notes, but not like this.
0
username280380
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
(Original post by 04MR17)
Also, I disapprove of the use of emojis as part of legislation. I'd let it slide in the notes, but not like this.
That's a TSR formatting error!
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
(Original post by Afcwimbledon2)
That's a TSR formatting error!
An easily avoided one...

(hereafter 'MHoC';).
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
(Original post by 04MR17)
1.c The design of maintenance and tuition fee loans and grants for students in higher education, but not including changes to the nature or repayment methods of student loan debt.

Would someone mind explaining what falls into the design of, that isn't part of the nature of, student finance...
The design of student finance is how much should be made available, to whom, and whether it should be a grant or a loan. The 'nature' refers to the nature of loan debt – things like repayment rates, thresholds etc.

(Original post by 04MR17)
Also, I disapprove of the use of emojis as part of legislation. I'd let it slide in the notes, but not like this.
That's particularly odd because I have no recollection of typing the semicolon, and it shouldn't be there.
0
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
No.

What’s the point in even having an executive branch if Labour want to transfer all its powers to the legislature?

Just like Corbyn’s proposed “War Powers Act” in real life.
0
CountBrandenburg
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
Oh joy... labour is still annoyed at me for that motion. I didn’t follow the motion exactly I must admit, but my reasoning was that we should not be pressing for a return to modular exams, especially so soon. My response therefore was mainly geared towards the second point in the motion and indeed took into account the debate had on the issue, to which I did sympathise with some of the points presented. AS levels aren’t worth half an A- level because... they don’t scale to represent the building upon of knowledge in comparison to the full qualification. That was my reasoning for my response and I believe it would be wrong to allow this to come to fruition exactly as specified.

Anyway, on a subject like education, a motion in regards to it should at least have leanway on how it is interpreted and implemented, otherwise surely the exact wording could be introduced as a bill. I would also ask why Education is the specific target of this bill, I know quite a few was annoyed with an earlier government response (I mean I understand the sentiments there since I voted in favour of that particular motion) . Is this not something that Labour would like to be applicable to all Secretaries of State?

Anyway I’m voting no on this
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
(Original post by Connor27)
No.

What’s the point in even having an executive branch if Labour want to transfer all its powers to the legislature?

Just like Corbyn’s proposed “War Powers Act” in real life.
Because the executive has no majority, in the MHoC system is not required to obtain anything near a majority, and is unwilling to obey the will of the House.

(Original post by CountBrandenburg)
Anyway, on a subject like education, a motion in regards to it should at least have leanway on how it is interpreted and implemented, otherwise surely the exact wording could be introduced as a bill. I would also ask why Education is the specific target of this bill, I know quite a few was annoyed with an earlier government response (I mean I understand the sentiments there since I voted in favour of that particular motion) . Is this not something that Labour would like to be applicable to all Secretaries of State?
Education contains a significantly larger number of meaningful powers that are not codified in law, so it's a natural place to start, with the policies set out. A motion under this bill would need to contain as much detail as an SoI doing the same thing would, though, I agree.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
(Original post by Connor27)
No.

What’s the point in even having an executive branch if Labour want to transfer all its powers to the legislature?

Just like Corbyn’s proposed “War Powers Act” in real life.
I'd agree if it weren't for the fact that the executive is a sub-set of the legislative and that parliament us sovereign not government.
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
Nay. Making policy decisions is the function of the executive, not the legislature.
0
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
(Original post by Saracen's Fez)
Because the executive has no majority, in the MHoC system is not required to obtain anything near a majority, and is unwilling to obey the will of the house.
So you would rather make children’s futures a political football to be tussled over in a perpetually hung parliament rather than leave it stable in the hands of ministers?

Not very responsible at all for a party that apparently sees itself as a government in waiting.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
(Original post by Connor27)
So you would rather make children’s futures a political football to be tussled over in a perpetually hung parliament rather than leave it stable in the hands of ministers?

Not very responsible at all for a party that apparently sees itself as a government in waiting.
the house makeup is more stable than government ministers
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
(Original post by Connor27)
So you would rather make children’s futures a political football to be tussled over in a perpetually hung parliament rather than leave it stable in the hands of ministers?

Not very responsible at all for a party that apparently sees itself as a government in waiting.
There's no reason why it would be (or indeed is) more stable in the hands of ministers. Whether changes are made by SoI or motion, they still have to clear this place.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
I'm failing to see the point other than for Labour to be able to write a bill that doesn't really do anything
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
I'm failing to see the point other than for Labour to be able to write a bill that doesn't really do anything
Nothing 'does anything' in this House.

If it passes I'd expect a good few motions in the future under the provisions of the bill.
0
CoffeeAndPolitics
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 years ago
#17
Abstain. Some reasonable arguments made but I'm currently unsure.
0
LibertarianMP
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
nay
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
Why just education? Why stop there? Why not all policy areas? It feels as though Labour are trying to draw power away from Government to the rest of the house, in one policy area only and that simply makes it seem like a bitter retort to the government statement which happened to be on education. If the motion called, and statement in response was on, say, health legislation, would you have written this bill for health policy?
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
(Original post by Saracen's Fez)
Nothing 'does anything' in this House.

If it passes I'd expect a good few motions in the future under the provisions of the bill.
Or instead of those motions bills or petitions could be used, it's also worth noting that all of those things given are legislated for and some have had primary legislation brought forwards
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (22)
17.19%
I'm not sure (3)
2.34%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (42)
32.81%
I have already dropped out (3)
2.34%
I'm not a current university student (58)
45.31%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed