Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Parliament
#1
Any ideas on Parliament. Can cover:
1) Legislation and mechanics
2) Marking
3) Anything else!
Steve
Acting Acting Head Av | Parliament | Prime Minister's Office | Cabinet Office | Treasury
Reply
Thanks given by:
#2
This is the key struggle in my opinion. It is a dog to be in government and writing legislation can sometimes feel like a part-time job. I wrote too many bills in the last round that gave so little return for the time investment I felt that I made. Legislating and governing has to be simplified, some how, some way.

Maybe we need to reduce the bill format down to a, say, 2-5 paragraph summary of what gets done. Wipe out the logistical concerns and the exact procedure of how this warrant gets granted or that schedule of drug offenses gets updated, and simply it down to: a mock bill name, 2+ sentences on what the mock bill does, 2+ sentences on what the anticipated impact would be per the government, and then admin-set assessments on what the economic impact would be and what (if any) groups take a public stance on the issue.
Dame Beatrice Oona Millar DBE MP FRSE RSA | Labour
Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1992- )
Member of Parliament for Glasgow Hillhead (1987- )
Member of Parliament for Edinburgh Leith (1957-1959)

Formerly: Parminder Chawla, Joshua Bertram, Lillian Nichols, Gareth Edwards, Andrew Pearson, L Chris Havilland, Mack Aldritt
Reply
Thanks given by:
#3
I endorse the above so much. I've never written legislation IG and have always been put off but he daunghting task of having no idea what I'm doing. Making it simple would be an easy way to reduce government workload and ensure long term viability of rounds imo.
MP for Kensington

(In previous lives: violated a confidence and supply agreement, tried to fight a man on Eton's nine-hole golf course, released a leaflet torpedoing ones own party, was likened to an M&M shovelling money into a fireplace and co-founded Solidarity 2.0 ft. much anarchy)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#4
(06-09-2018, 09:40 PM)Lillian Nichols Wrote: This is the key struggle in my opinion. It is a dog to be in government and writing legislation can sometimes feel like a part-time job. I wrote too many bills in the last round that gave so little return for the time investment I felt that I made. Legislating and governing has to be simplified, some how, some way.

Maybe we need to reduce the bill format down to a, say, 2-5 paragraph summary of what gets done. Wipe out the logistical concerns and the exact procedure of how this warrant gets granted or that schedule of drug offenses gets updated, and simply it down to: a mock bill name, 2+ sentences on what the mock bill does, 2+ sentences on what the anticipated impact would be per the government, and then admin-set assessments on what the economic impact would be and what (if any) groups take a public stance on the issue.

This so much
"the fagnoglin"  Moray Mac Gill Fhaolain MP Aberdeen North 1964-Present

1973-1974 Shadow Secretary of State for Transport
1976-1978 Secretary of State for Transport
1978-1979 Secretary of State for Scotland
1979-1987 Shadow Secretary of State for Workers and Pensions
1992-Present Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Constitutional Affairs & Devolution

fmrly Sean Kapur fmr. Shadow Minister of Environment, Housing, and Ag 
Reply
Thanks given by:
#5
(06-09-2018, 09:40 PM)Lillian Nichols Wrote: Maybe we need to reduce the bill format down to a, say, 2-5 paragraph summary of what gets done. Wipe out the logistical concerns and the exact procedure of how this warrant gets granted or that schedule of drug offenses gets updated, and simply it down to: a mock bill name, 2+ sentences on what the mock bill does, 2+ sentences on what the anticipated impact would be per the government, and then admin-set assessments on what the economic impact would be and what (if any) groups take a public stance on the issue.

Could you give an example of what this would look like?
Andy
Acting Head Admin
Speaker of the House of Commons
Advisor for the Labour Party, the Cabinet Office and the Home Office
Poll wrangler and election psephologist
Scandalmonger

I forget Andy has political opinions. I always just think of him as a Civil Servant in real life - Mac
Reply
Thanks given by:
#6
I think we have done something similar to that in the past and it ended up being more work, iirc. Steve will remember when every bill was written in plain English and was accompanied by a summary which laid out some of the more procedural elements. For my part, I don't know that making legislation simpler is so much a game mechanic thing as it is an issue of how and what we as a player base choose to argue about. Too often, we debate the details of a bill and make a speech along the lines of "While this is a laudable goal, Mr. Speaker, I do not feel as though this legislation will accomplish it due to Paragraph 8 subsection 94's use of a personal noun when it should have used a preposition." The only mechanical change that can fix that is if the A-team makes it clear that those kinds of arguments won't win you points--only substantive debate will.
[Image: VO5PA6L.png]
R I C H A R D • D E • V I L L I E R S
C O N S E R V A T I V E
for
G R A N T H A M

Shadow SoS for Regions, Nations, & Devolution | Constitutional Affairs

CORNERSTONE GROUP
Reply
Thanks given by:
#7
So, this bill (http://www.politicsuk.net/hastings/showt...p?tid=6092) would look something like:

Bill Title: Hunting Act

Legal Change: Creates a criminal offence to hunt wild mammals for sport, to offer land for the hunt of wild mammals for sport, or to allow their dog to participate in a hunt of wild mammals for sport. The criminal offence is a fine.

Impact: The bill applies to England and Wales only and is intended to spot the hunting of wild mammals (particularly) foxes for sport.

Economic Assessment: Admins generate some numbers about potential lost tourism money or something.

Groups:
Support: Environmentalists A, B, and C
Concern: Farmers Faction J
Opposition: Uppity White Boys' Club, the Duke of Edinburgh
Dame Beatrice Oona Millar DBE MP FRSE RSA | Labour
Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1992- )
Member of Parliament for Glasgow Hillhead (1987- )
Member of Parliament for Edinburgh Leith (1957-1959)

Formerly: Parminder Chawla, Joshua Bertram, Lillian Nichols, Gareth Edwards, Andrew Pearson, L Chris Havilland, Mack Aldritt
Reply
#8
Can we get PMBs?
MP for Kensington

(In previous lives: violated a confidence and supply agreement, tried to fight a man on Eton's nine-hole golf course, released a leaflet torpedoing ones own party, was likened to an M&M shovelling money into a fireplace and co-founded Solidarity 2.0 ft. much anarchy)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#9
(06-10-2018, 01:50 PM)Lillian Nichols Wrote: So, this bill (http://www.politicsuk.net/hastings/showt...p?tid=6092) would look something like:

Bill Title: Hunting Act

Legal Change: Creates a criminal offence to hunt wild mammals for sport, to offer land for the hunt of wild mammals for sport, or to allow their dog to participate in a hunt of wild mammals for sport. The criminal offence is a fine.

Impact: The bill applies to England and Wales only and is intended to spot the hunting of wild mammals (particularly) foxes for sport.

Economic Assessment: Admins generate some numbers about potential lost tourism money or something.

Groups:
Support: Environmentalists A, B, and C
Concern: Farmers Faction J
Opposition: Uppity White Boys' Club, the Duke of Edinburgh

Very much pro this, we need to make the process as simple as possible for everyone involved. Alternatively, if we insist on having the bills formatted like actual laws, we could make some kind of input form that generates the bill and then have this simplified version attached underneath as a tl;dr? Also some kind of PMB mechanic would be nice, but not essential.
Thomas Joseph Lowe | MP for Mansfield (1979-Present)

"We are not just here to manage capitalism but to change society and to define its finer values." - Tony Benn
Reply
Thanks given by:
#10
I'm not sure I really like the simplified bill format. It's not as if we're asking players to write real bills in legalese, just to stick to sections and clauses. People probably overthink the format a little too much, but some detail is essential to the difference between government and opposition. Governments have to produce bills that supply some detail on how they'll achieve their aims, while oppositions get the leeway to change them between various policy papers and speeches. For a thing like fox hunting, the new format might be clear enough on the details, but what about overhauling the NHS or the schools system? We'd run the risk of the bill being open to multiple interpretation.
the Rt Hon. Angus "Gus" Quigley MP | Conservative MP for Crosby (1992-present)
Opposition Chief Whip (2000-) and Shadow Infrastructure and Transport Secretary (2000-)
Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1999-2000)

"Get Netflix at the PM's Office."
- Sybrand Buma, when asked what his first act as Prime Minister of the Netherlands would be.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#11
If I am honest, I think the simplified version of that Bill is too simplified. There isn't any substance to it, and I worry that the too much debating time will be spent on asking questions that could have been answered by having a more fleshed out bill.
MP For Hexham 1987 -
Reply
Thanks given by:
#12
Yeah, I a have always found that where flexibility is given in these situations it tends to just lead governments in the debate to say that their vague wording does all the positive things one could imagine whilst simultaneously not meaning anything problematic which it may imply, creating a moving target for the other side.
Ayesha Hassan
MP for Holborn and St Pancras (2010-Present)
Shadow Secretary of State for the Home Department
Shadow Leader of the House of Commons
Progress
Formerly Shadow Secretary of State for International Development

Reply
#13
I had several things to mention/suggest but my bad memory tricked me, and I didn't take notes of these... :X anyway, from what I remember:

Do not kill bills dead if they do not get accepted within a week. As far as I know that's not what happens in RL, but more importantly: it severely reduces the chance of PMBs getting through. First, it takes government time to actually come to address a bill which is, most porbably, a "non-priority" matter anyway. And also, good practice requires governemnts to get any bill reviewed by the Civil Service (and Cabinet) which frankly takes time.

PMBs, in my way, are a great way for backbench MPs to get involved and get their message across.
The Rt Hon Angela Harvey MP | Labour Party, Socialist Campaign Group

Deputy Prime Minister & Deputy Leader of the Labour Party (1992 - Incumbent)
Member of Parliament for Dover (1992 - Incumbent)

Previously: "A nobody backbencher", "Backbench Spokesperson for Everything"

Reply
Thanks given by: Richard De Villiers (CON)


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)