Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Your seat allows an MP to vote. But thats all. Proposing a Bill just allows the MP's to vote on it. heres the big thing: proposing gives you no say in whether or not it passes. Take the wtf bill. From what has been said it wont pass, but how did it harm anything to propose it?

    If this passes I wouldn't be able to post another WTF Bill. I think that they would lose interest in the HoC then, and the admins will be annoyed at having a party who are that inactive. I'm not saying they are inactive now, but I feel they would become inactive if this passed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If this passes I wouldn't be able to post another WTF Bill. I think that they would lose interest in the HoC then, and the admins will be annoyed at having a party who are that inactive. I'm not saying they are inactive now, but I feel they would become inactive if this passed.
    Tough, if I can wait they can wait if they are commited enough they can wait for the election.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    This is an amendment so I'm going to get my two cents in. We don't allow PMB's from anyone because we would get silly ones from people who don't care about the HoC. But parties have to have at least 10 people interested to form at all, and admin approval. Isn't 10 people enough influence to allow a party to submit a bill?
    I have to agree with all the above.
    Offline

    3
    I'm going to vote Nay on this, because I don't see that a party should be prevented from submitting bills. I don't give a **** if it's unconstitutional to allow them to, this is a model house of commons and the more bills the better. Although I disagree with the bill that's caused this amendment, I fully support the right of it to be submitted. I know I'm going to be outvoted though, and I think you're all incredibly anal.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jangrafess)
    I'm going to vote Nay on this, because I don't see that a party should be prevented from submitting bills. I don't give a **** if it's unconstitutional to allow them to, this is a model house of commons and the more bills the better. Although I disagree with the bill that's caused this amendment, I fully support the right of it to be submitted. I know I'm going to be outvoted though, and I think you're all incredibly anal.
    Remember the 66% requirement :yy:
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by LawBore)
    Remember the 66% requirement :yy:
    I still see it passing.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jangrafess)
    I still see it passing.
    More's the pity.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Podgeykins)
    Perhaps submit bill proposals which can be debated in the house, but an MP must take it up as their own for it to actually be submitted to a vote. That way its similar to the real life parliament, but no one is left out.
    I'm pretty sure that's the system that is in place at the moment. I mean the WTF bill got here because the Speaker thought it was okay for us to debate it, but it hasn't/won't go to a vote because no onereally supports it (except WTF :p: ).

    Personally, I don't see a huge problem with these silly bills.
    I think we should make sure that the Speaker is not bound to accept all suggestions from outside of the House of Commons, and that he may say that so and so bill was not put for debate for blah blah reason in the "Speaker's Chamber' or something like that.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with a lot said before. Allow non-MP parties or whatever to present a proposal, but introduce the requirement from support of a small group of MP's. I'd say have a nominating MP and a seconding MP would be enough.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Can I propose a compromise: make it so that if a party without MPs or a member who isn't MP want to submit a bill they have to get an MP to second it.

    This is a minor extra hurdle, given there are 50 MPs so finding one to second your bill shouldn't be hard, and it allows new parties or members to get involved, but it makes MPs more than just voting machines. I think the principle that people who aren't elected can only have indirect influence - persuading, lobbying and arguing - is a sensible principle. This effectively formalises lobbying, which would be an interesting side part of the HoC, IMHO.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If the bill can be seconded by an MP I see no reason to stop them submitting. This way it may stop stupid waste of time bills.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Hear! Hear!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    I think it should follow the same procedure as PMB's - the seconding by other MPs or whatever it is.
    This. Why should we allow unelected individuals to post PMBs with support when parties can't?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    If this passes I wouldn't be able to post another WTF Bill. I think that they would lose interest in the HoC then, and the admins will be annoyed at having a party who are that inactive. I'm not saying they are inactive now, but I feel they would become inactive if this passed.
    I doubt we would lose interest in the HoC. Not permanently, since the next election would rekindle it. We would become inactive until then though, because there is nothing for us to be active for for the next few months. An election campaign doesn't require planning.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think that this is a good idea. If they have got enough members to form (surely enough to get a seat) then they should be able to submit bills.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    This. Why should we allow unelected individuals to post PMBs with support when parties can't?
    I thought you had to be an MP to propose a PMB?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 35mm_)
    I thought you had to be an MP to propose a PMB?
    A non MP may, but they must have an MP support it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    A non MP may, but they must have an MP support it.
    Oh okay, thanks.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    A non MP may, but they must have an MP support it.
    Alright have you decided thats the way we are going, I assumed that we would put it to the vote.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 01kij114)
    Alright have you decided thats the way we are going, I assumed that we would put it to the vote.
    Well, as I understand it thats how things are done already. But perhaps I'm wrong there.
 
 
 
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: July 27, 2009
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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.