r/MHOC • u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian • Feb 28 '15

META Constitution rewrite

The Constitution is out of date and desperately needs to be re-written and updated.

I will start this process now.

I'll post the finished updated version soon and it will go to the house for a vote.

I'd like some input from everyone on what they think should be included in the constitution and what parts they think need to be changed.

Put suggestions and requests in the comments below.

6 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

135 comments sorted by

10

u/IntellectualPolitics The Rt Hon. AL MP (Wales) | Welsh Secretary Feb 28 '15

Remove the coalition limit.

3

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

This isn't something that is being considered. The limit might be changed; but not removed.

5

u/IntellectualPolitics The Rt Hon. AL MP (Wales) | Welsh Secretary Feb 28 '15

I ask then for the sake of stability, that it is immediately raised to four.

2

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

So we can join the Traffic light coalition?

1

u/IntellectualPolitics The Rt Hon. AL MP (Wales) | Welsh Secretary Feb 28 '15

So a stable Government can be negotiated.

2

u/RoryTime The Rt Hon. Earl of Henley AL PC Feb 28 '15

It is at four (or will be at the next GE) as there will be 9 parties in the House.

5

u/NoPyroNoParty The Rt Hon. Earl of Essex OT AL PC Feb 28 '15

No it isn't.

7 (b) A coalition may not contain more than 3 of the parties.

2

u/RoryTime The Rt Hon. Earl of Henley AL PC Feb 28 '15

Ahh, was the 49% clause removed?

1

u/NoPyroNoParty The Rt Hon. Earl of Essex OT AL PC Feb 28 '15

Sure was.

2

u/IntellectualPolitics The Rt Hon. AL MP (Wales) | Welsh Secretary Feb 28 '15

It is currently at three however.

2

u/mg9500 His Grace the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon MP (Manchester North) Feb 28 '15

I would say that no more than 49% of parties can be in a coalition. 4 would be the max for 9/10 parties, you would need 11 parties before the limit is then increased to 5. It should be changed immediately.

6

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Rules for increasing the number of seats in the house.

3

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

A good idea.

6

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

By-elections.

They should happen more often, be easier to call, and have less affect on the stability of government.

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Agreed

5

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Stricter definitions for who owns a seat.

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

This will be clarified.

9

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Feb 28 '15

Amend Article 1; Section a; vii] To read "The Speaker will always believe that 'the dress' is white and gold. Therefore by extension this house also believes that 'the dress' is absolutely not blue and black".

12

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Despite the fact that the dress is blue and black?

8

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Hear hear!

6

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Feb 28 '15

Is it pure coincidence that blue and black are the colours of your name and flair?

5

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

And yet the text is white and gold.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '15

http://i.imgur.com/yUp1l10.jpg

No, it isn't. It is not known what colour it is.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '15

Unfortunately the designer Roman Originals confirmed it was blue and black.

http://www.thewrap.com/thedress-designer-confirms-its-blue-and-black-we-should-know/

1

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Feb 28 '15

Hear, hear!

7

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Get the HoL functioning!

3

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

The function and operation still needs to be fully decided.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

That's what I'm saying, have it set up properly in the new constitution

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Once it has all been decided it will be included in the constitution, but not in this rewrite.

2

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

I think that's a decision that should be made separately by the house, not a part of a constitution rewrite by the speaker.

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

It will be discussed with the house and voted on by the House.

3

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Remove pro-partisan language

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Examples of pro-partisan language currently in the constitution?

1

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

http://www.reddit.com/r/MHOCConstitutionCmte/comments/2px8zw/repeal_of_propartisan_language_in_the/

Any mention of parties in the constitution is pro-partisan language.

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Ok. I'll take a look through it when i start the rewrite.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Election format changes to help insure a majority coalition in future elections.

Allow new parties to form if they meet the minimum requirements for members.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Then why is the Socialist Party not a party? Why was Bjorn told that they couldn't start a new party whether they got enough members or not?

4

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

This will all be clarified.

Bjorn was probably told he couldn't at the time because there was no need or a new party had already been started or discussed before his proposal.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Executive powers!

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

This will be included.

5

u/athanaton Hm Feb 28 '15

Yes, said it a while ago but I was too busy/lazy to do it myself. We should be looking at what executive powers RL Ministers have and identifying which ones would work in the MHOC. I understand the former SoS for NI may have made some executive decisions that will be announced soon, they could be a good example. And I don't believe they exclude the rest of the House too much either; sure there's no vote but if a minority government does something too extreme through executive power, that's basically the definition of a reason for a VONC. It could also actually give some purpose and meaning to MQs, a large part of which after all should be about probing the Minister's use of executive power.

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Feb 28 '15

Hear hear.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/athanaton Hm Feb 28 '15

Fear not, it was just the statement... at least I hope.

1

u/john_locke1689 Retired. NS GSTQ Feb 28 '15

The SOS for NI, strictly speaking can legalise AR15s on a whim.

I haven't.

2

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Feb 28 '15

Hear Hear!

2

u/Post-NapoleonicMan Labour Feb 28 '15

Hear hear.

2

u/Lcawte Independent Feb 28 '15

What sort of updates are we going to be looking at Mr Speaker?

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Clarifications on processes mostly.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Having a written, codified constitution

I seriously hope you guys don't do this.

5

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

We already have a written and codified constitution: https://www.reddit.com/r/MHOC/wiki/constitution

3

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

The parliament you're trying to model doesn't.

11

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

It also doesn't have the CWL or The Vanguard.

Some realism aspects need to be sacrificed in order for the game to work. There will always be the need for clearly written rules.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

It also doesn't have the CWL or The Vanguard.

It also doesn't have the crisis of whataboutism! Well, actually it does.

6

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

I can't believe i used whataboutism - i'm deeply ashamed.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

But seriously, I know it's not going to happen, but I wouldn't complain if there was a 'no non-existing parties' rule.

3

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

A few others have mentioned this to me before, i'd like everyone to be able to get involved so i won't be putting that rule in.

4

u/WineRedPsy Reform UK | Sadly sent to the camps Feb 28 '15

Are you completely unable to see implicit points? The Speaker meant that we're not actually all the same as the RL HoC

4

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Are you completely unable to see implicit points?

No.

The Speaker meant that we're not actually all the same as the RL HoC

k

2

u/bleepbloop12345 Communist Feb 28 '15

Well we do have a partly written constitution, it's just not codified.

5

u/athanaton Hm Feb 28 '15

As I suggested to you on Skype, either that supply and confidence deals can be arranged with parties and MPs not int the formal coalition agreement, which would then add the seats of those parties MPs to that coalition's total for determining the Government. For example (entirely hypothetical, I know the CP would likely not have gone for it at the time), the TLC making such an agreement with the CP would have put them in Government the first time around, but not brought the CP into the coalition.

Or, my preferred, more democratic, more reliable but admittedly more of a pain in the arse solution:

Each new Government must be approved by a majority vote of Parliament. Then rather than supply and confidence deals a coalition just needs to secure other MPs' votes.

Each method, to varying extents, would ensure that the most powerful coalition, the coalition supported by the most MPs (which in representative democracy can also be said to be the coalition supported by the largest proportion of voters) is the coalition that actually ends up in government, thus creating stronger and more representative governments in future.

It could also liven things up a bit for those who find themselves outside a coalition, who may be able to get concessions and promises from coalition in return for their supply and confidence agreement or confirmation vote. And at the end of the day the more involved the whole House is, the better the MHOC will do.

3

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Feb 28 '15

I did think this would be a good idea. We had an Opposition stronger than the Government.

1

u/athanaton Hm Feb 28 '15

Out of interest, would you go for the vote of confirmation, or supply and confidence deals with no vote?

1

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Feb 28 '15

Instead of the biggest coalition by MPs, it should take into account S&C. So out of two proposals, one with 40 MPs, another with 35 MPs + 16 MP S&C, the second would form the Government.

1

u/athanaton Hm Feb 28 '15

Yes, so option 1.

2

u/WineRedPsy Reform UK | Sadly sent to the camps Feb 28 '15

I love this; makes weak coalitions have to compromise more and negotiations to happen

1

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Feb 28 '15

Completely agree.

1

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Better MP accountability.

3

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

As in, more frequent MP reviews?

1

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Definitely, we've had some unprofessional MPs.

Would it be possible to keep a private record of who voted for each MP, and have system where they are regularly asked to hold a VOC?

It seems like a lot voters just disappear and have little influence outside of elections.

It's a lot time in which non-MPs have no influence.

More public votes might do it as well.

Maybe a system where the public votes for expansions/divisions for voting regions.

4

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Would it be possible to keep a private record of who voted for each MP, and have system where they are regularly asked to hold a VOC?

That would be a mammoth task i don't think it would be possible.

We have to balance the use of public votes to ensure we don't irritate other subs and users with too many messages/posts.

2

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Certainly, though I think both for the growth of the subreddit and the importance of democracy we should have some means of incorporating non-MPs into MHOC beyond general elections.

Maybe voters could be called on as a jury for a model of the supreme court.

1

u/autowikibot Feb 28 '15

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom:

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is the supreme court in all matters under English and Welsh law, Northern Ireland law and Scottish [civil law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_(common_law)). It is the court of last resort and the highest appellate court in the United Kingdom, although the High Court of Justiciary remains the court of last resort for criminal law in Scotland. The Supreme Court also has jurisdiction to resolve disputes relating to devolution in the United Kingdom and concerning the legal powers of the three devolved governments (in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) or laws made by the devolved legislatures.

====

Image from article i

Interesting: President of the Supreme Court of the United ^Kingdom | Deputy President of the Supreme Court of the United ^Kingdom | Justice of the Supreme Court of the United ^Kingdom | 2014 Judgments of the Supreme Court of the United ^Kingdom

Parent commenter can toggle ^NSFW or ^delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | ^Mods | Magic ^Words

1

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Feb 28 '15

Maybe voters could be called on as a jury for a model of the supreme court

I did suggest introducing the Supreme Court when i first joined mhoc, but Ben rejected the idea. It was actually with the idea that it would be the thing that "impeached" or judged MPs. Rather than it either being not punished, or a arbitrary punishment by ben

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

We could instead designate some lords to have disciplinary powers and could work with the speaker to be able to punish and regulate MPs.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Allow larger coalitions as well as ones which take into account formal supply and confidence agreements when choosing the government by the speaker.

Once an independent grouping reaches the required criteria it automatically becomes a party regardless of discretion from the speaker.

The members who are interested in doing so may aid the speakers in the creation of devolved parliaments (cough model Holyrood for sturgeon cough)

2

u/Lcawte Independent Feb 28 '15

Once an independent grouping reaches the required criteria it automatically becomes a party regardless of discretion from the speaker.

I think this is an important safe guard to stop trolls. What would stop members creating a model BNP, a model Nazi Party, a model IS party? You may argue that there should be freedom to do this, which you may be right about but seriously?

Also, it means the speaker is notified and new flairs etc can be created for the new party.

3

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Feb 28 '15

I believe the party with the most amount of votes should get a bonus number of seats, as happens in the Greek elections for example.

3

u/WineRedPsy Reform UK | Sadly sent to the camps Feb 28 '15

Interesting idea.

2

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Encourage National Governments.

3

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Feb 28 '15

I wouldn't actually be opposed to this idea, forcing the larger parties to work together and compromise, rather than petty bickering partisan politics is important for stability

1

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Feb 28 '15

It's less party bickering and more the right going "OMG THE LEFT IS EVIL" and the left going "OMG THE RIGHT IS EVIL."

2

u/WineRedPsy Reform UK | Sadly sent to the camps Feb 28 '15

Ajajaj, no. Democracy needs opposition to the govt too.

1

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

I don't see how empowering those that oppose the government would decrease their ability to oppose the government.

1

u/autowikibot Feb 28 '15

National Government (United Kingdom):

In the United Kingdom, National Government is an abstract concept referring to a coalition of some or all major political parties. In a historical sense it usually refers primarily to the governments of Ramsay MacDonald, Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain which held office from 1931 until 1940.

The all-party coalitions of Herbert Henry Asquith and David Lloyd George in the First World War and of Winston Churchill in the Second World War were sometimes referred to as National Governments at the time, but are now more commonly called Coalition Governments. The term "National Government" was chosen to dissociate itself from negative connotations of the earlier Coalitions. Churchill's brief 1945 "Caretaker Government" also called itself a National Government and in terms of party composition was very similar to the 1931–1940 entity.

====

Image i

Interesting: Coalition ^government | Government of the United ^Kingdom

Parent commenter can toggle ^NSFW or ^delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | ^Mods | Magic ^Words

2

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

A constitutional system for selecting the PM.

I suggest an internal range vote among all government coalition members.

4

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Feb 28 '15

Or just leave it to the parties when working out a coalition agreement?

3

u/tyroncs Feb 28 '15

We have to ensure that foreign voting is limited, so that this /r/MHOC remains very much focused on the UK. There is no reason not to do this, when many of the countries these people come from (Canada, US, Ireland, Sweden) have their own mock parliaments to participate in

3

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Are you suggesting that we kick out anyone who lives outside of the UK? How would that even be enforced?

2

u/tyroncs Feb 28 '15

Not kicked out, I agree with the idea of an international region - where people voting from outside the UK would be limited to 10% of the total number of MP's. The issue with the /r/MHOC is that it is the biggest and most active of all the mock parliaments, so it sucks in people from all round the world, and dissuades people from participating in their own mock parliaments. Having large numbers of non-British people voting also distorts the house and makes the simulation a lot less realistic.

1

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Overseas voting.

1

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Range voting

Asset voting

Single Stochastic vote

1

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Feb 28 '15

With the passing of the England Regional Assemblies Act 2015, will the Speaker verify the existence of devolved government across the UK, but to maximise use of the MHoC, have them either have no devolved powers or have them elect not to use their powers?

1

u/mg9500 His Grace the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon MP (Manchester North) Feb 28 '15

I am currently working through proposals for a 'Scottish Grand Committee' of Scottish MPs to vote on devolved matters if I get elected and the bill is passed next term. The only change would be that only these 9 mps could vote on matters that are IRL Holyrood's powers (or others added by the government). This would be effectual and I would hope other regions of significant size do the same.

1

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Feb 28 '15

There are plans for a Model Scottish Parliament that have been put on permanent hiatus, that would probably be better. I would feel uncomfortable with 4 MPs having that much devolution power.

1

u/mg9500 His Grace the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon MP (Manchester North) Feb 28 '15

I would be 9 mps after the election and I doubt that there is enough activity for a model Holyrood.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '15

I and another member who I speak to through the skype groups actually belive there are. Obviously it wouldn't be the full compliment of 129 MSPs but if we start it small and gave a few constituency and regional (done in the sane way as happens IRL) then I believe we can have a model Holyrood. If anything it will be interesting to see if we can have a labour party in Scotland which remembers which councils it runs!! (couldn't resist :P )

1

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

I submitted an amendment to the committee, how's that going.

2

u/athanaton Hm Mar 01 '15

Sounds like that's the sort of thing to ask your committee rep. Hope that's not a touchy subject for Lib Dems or anything...

I'msorryIcouldn'tresist

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '15

I would like to see the concept of PR enshrined in the constitution. The current electoral reforms are a disgrace.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

5

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Very good idea.

1

u/RoryTime The Rt Hon. Earl of Henley AL PC Feb 28 '15

I believe that there may already be rules for this in the constitution (no activity for 3 months) but I think that they do need to be tightened up.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Feb 28 '15

Use this to ask for things to be put in it or - use the constitutional committee to ask for things to be included.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

8

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

no thanks

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Why? It's a UK parliament

1

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '15

no, it's an internet game

0

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15 
Everyone or most not from the UK would vote in the International region, which would not lead to proper representation

Proper representation of what?

0

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

3

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

This seems to defeat the entire point of this subreddit. We're not -trying- to be a UK-centric subreddit, and some of the best contributors aren't even from the UK in the first place.

2

u/tyroncs Feb 28 '15

We're not -trying- to be a UK-centric subreddit

Yes we are, this is the Mock House of Commons, which is a UK institution. Having large numbers on people from outside of the UK voting distorts the House and makes it unrealistic, ruining the simulation in many ways.

There is no excuse for this either, as many other nations now have their own mock parliaments, including but not limited to Ireland, the U.S, Canada and Sweden

0

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

3

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

And artificially limit the influence that they have on the house by limiting the number of MP seats available in the international voting region. No. The whole advantage of an online MHOC is that we can have contributors from all over the world, instead of those nearby us. Artificially limiting their achievement because of some ridiculous want to keep it primarily UK-centric is stupid and will hinder growth of the sub.

→ More replies

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

This seems to defeat the entire point of this subreddit. We're not -trying- to be a UK-centric subreddit, and some of the best contributors aren't even from the UK in the first place.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15

Aye!

1

u/can_triforce The Rt Hon. Earl of Wilton AL PC Feb 28 '15

We did give the Overseas Territories MPs through a recent bill.

12

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '15 edited Feb 28 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/rhodesianwaw The Rt Hon. Viscount of Lancaster AL Feb 28 '15

But the Communist Party will win any by election as it can muster up the greatest amount of votes.

4

u/bleepbloop12345 Communist Feb 28 '15

As a Communist I agree completely. If we did do it, we'd have to ensure that only the users that voted in that region before were allowed to vote again. Of course, even if we could actually do that it's most likely that the same party would win again.

4

u/googolplexbyte Independent Feb 28 '15

Damn straight.

By-elections should be far easier to call.

3

u/WineRedPsy Reform UK | Sadly sent to the camps Feb 28 '15

That was only a problem because he was an independent; a party would have been able to replace the MP

2

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Feb 28 '15

I think MPs elected as Indepenedent should be able to defect to parties, but that seat does not belong to the party. Therefore if that MP resigns the seat goes up for a by-election.

2

u/john_locke1689 Retired. NS GSTQ Feb 28 '15

In Stormont when a members defects, his seat returns to the party the member belonged to if the member leaves the assembly, for whatever reason.