Poll: Do you agree with this Amendment?
As many as are of the opinion, Aye (19)
51.35%
On the Contrary, Nay (15)
40.54%
Abstain. (3)
8.11%
This discussion is closed.
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#1
A227 - Voting Review Amendment

Proposed by: CatusStarbright (Deputy Speaker, Independent)
Seconded by: London090 (Conservative), Glaz (Labour), The Mogg (Conservative), barnetlad (Independent)

This House would amend the Guidance Document as follows:

Amend the section entitled ‘MP Activity & Voting Reviews’ from:

1) Four weeks after the State Opening of Parliament, the Speaker will publish a voting review outlining the turnout of each MP to all Division Lobby votes so far that term excluding amendments.
2) Vacant seats and seats with an attendance strictly less than 70% will be highlighted as under consideration for removal.
3) Four weeks after the previous voting review, another voting review will be published.
i) Seats with an attendance strictly less than 70% in the votes since the previous review will be highlighted as under consideration for removal.
ii) A highlighted seat which was also highlighted in any previous voting review during the same term will be put up for by-election; normal by-election procedures apply.
iii) Parties whose seat(s) were put up for by-election as the result of a voting review are prohibited from participating in the resultant by-election.
4) A new voting review is published every four weeks after and these procedures are repeated until the end of term.
5) In exceptional circumstances, the Speaker may choose not to conduct a voting review or to not carry out a by-election, and should inform the House of such intention.
6) Seats with an attendance strictly less than 50% in the votes since the previous review will be put up for by-election; normal by-election procedures apply.


To:


1) Four weeks after the State Opening of Parliament, and every four weeks thereafter during the term, the Speaker will publish a voting review outlining the turnout of each MP to all Division Lobby votes so far that term excluding amendments.
2) Seats with an attendance strictly less than 60% will be highlighted as under consideration for removal.
3) A highlighted seat which was also highlighted in any previous voting review during the same term will be put up for by-election; normal by-election procedures apply.
4) Seats with an attendance strictly less than 40% in the votes since the previous review will be put up for by-election; normal by-election procedures apply.
5) Parties whose seat(s) were put up for by-election as the result of a voting review are prohibited from participating in the resultant by-election.
6) In exceptional circumstances, the Speaker may choose not to conduct a voting review or not to carry out a by-election, and should inform the House of such intention.


Notes

This section has been rendered a little more concise generally, but the key change here is that the thresholds for seat removal and highlighting have each been lowered by 10%. Vacant seats are also no longer automatically highlighted in the first review of the term, as the author of this amendment did not deem that clause necessary to this section.

With the House only just having avoided a nine-seat by-election due to Andrew97 using his discretion as Speaker under clause 5 of this section, it is clearly time to take steps to prevent the ridiculous seat losses we have been seeing for a while now. Other solutions are certainly possible, but this is the simplest. The author intends to at least spark debate in this area even if this amendment does not pass.
0
TheRadishPrince
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 weeks ago
#2
I will back this. Meaningful and engaging debate is more important to me than a spotless voting record in order to better enjoy the MHOC as a whole in my opinion and I would much prefer someone who debates often but isn't as consistent a voter as opposed to someone who is a silent, regular voter and this better allows that first type to exist.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 weeks ago
#3
As said in the main debate. This is not the best way to deal with our woes.
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 weeks ago
#4
This is a step along the way to helping the House cope with current challenges.
0
JMR2019.
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 weeks ago
#5
I will be voting for this and encourage all Labour MPs to do so.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 weeks ago
#6
Nope, this doesn't even treat symptoms, let alone root causes.
0
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#7
The ayes to the right, 19
The Noes to the left, 15
abstains, 3

The ayes have it, the ayes have it! Unlock!
0
X
new posts
Back
to top

What's your favourite genre?

Rock (164)
24.62%
Pop (163)
24.47%
Jazz (26)
3.9%
Classical (40)
6.01%
Hip-Hop (121)
18.17%
Electronic (43)
6.46%
Indie (109)
16.37%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed