censure MP Vladimir - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

This is a the archive of the "PoFo Parliament". A user-run project.
Forum rules: This is a the archive of the "PoFo Parliament". A user-run project.
User avatar
By Andres
#13071487
I move to censure Vera Politica for that heinous act of intimidation. We will not be silenced authoritarian scum!

We also need more fistfights in parliament.
By Zyx
#13071773
*coldly punches Andres in the back of the head with a brass knuckle, knocking him unconscious.*

No more ridiculousness.
User avatar
By MistyTiger
#13072307
Boys, boys! No punching, Zyx!

Andres, must everyone be censured if people are displeased over what they say? It's just a game. I heard that said from someone on your side. If you are displeased with any member of this government, then take it up with them in private...not by censuring. The act of censure should not be abused so. Censuring should be used for censuring members for wrongdoing as it relates to legislation and documentation, not to mere discussion.
User avatar
By Dr House
#13072329
I think MistyTiger should be censured for suggesting censure should not be abused.

:|

Also, Zyx should be censured for being weird.
User avatar
By MistyTiger
#13072333
I meant that censure should be limited. It should not be used for just anything in Parliament.

If Thunderhawk wanted, he could file a lawsuit against Vladimir.

If I get censured, the education bill will be greatly delayed.
User avatar
By Andres
#13072496
Andres, must everyone be censured if people are displeased over what they say?
I second Dr House's motion to censure MistyTiger and Zyx. :|
User avatar
By ingliz
#13072513
Nobody is being censured. Andres would have to bring this up on the floor of the House and I, as deputy speaker, would politely tell him to sit down and shut up. Vladimir has apologised for his poor choice of words, this nonsense stops here.
User avatar
By Doomhammer
#13072531
Nobody is being censured. Andres would have to bring this up on the floor of the House and I, as deputy speaker, would politely tell him to sit down and shut up. Vladimir has apologised for his poor choice of words, this nonsense stops here.

What is the procedure to propose the censure of an MP?
I can't find the RoP constitution anywhere.
User avatar
By ingliz
#13072534
You would have to bring a private members bill naming the MP and his alleged misdeeds and then it is voted on. It means nothing, achieves nothing, and is a complete waste of time as there is no procedure for impeachment.

If you were to bring a bill laying out the procedure for impeaching MP's, or Officers of the House, it would need to pass with a super majority of 66% of the votes of the full house - 21 votes in favour, impossible.

Plus the government controls the parliamentary legislative calendar. Do you think they would grant time for a private members bill, a stunt, designed to "impeach" the government? :lol:
User avatar
By Doomhammer
#13072548
I was just curious.

And I don't like your tone.
User avatar
By ingliz
#13072558
The interim document gives no hint of how an MP is formally censured but it does allow government/private members' bills.

Once you start punishing MP's that is "constitutional" and it would require a super majority.

The legislative calendar does seem to be controlled by the government.

If you disagree with my interpretation, please feel free to contact the GM.

ingliz, Clerk of the House/Deputy Speaker

ps. This is not the floor of the House and so this is not a "ruling" but if it came to the floor, and Demo was not sitting, that is how I would rule.
User avatar
By ingliz
#13084967
I was correct:

The interim document gives no hint of how an MP is formally censured but it does allow government/private members' bills.

There is no procedure for impeachment.

So although you could work out a process and legitimise it with an absolute majority (16 votes)

Article 3. (h) wrote:Amendments to this document must receive 50% +1 of the votes

Once you start punishing MP's you would require a super majority (24 votes).

Article 2. (e) wrote:...or by a 3/4 vote of the Parliament to impeach that MP.

A larger super majority than I thought it seems.

The only punishment envisaged is interdiction.

The legislative calendar does seem to be controlled by the government at least in "constitutional" matters.

Article 3. (a) wrote:...private member's bills may be introduced by any MP, as long as this legislation has no constitutional significance.

And there is an argument to be made that the legislative calendar is controlled by the government full stop.

Article 4. (c) wrote:- Those ministers will have the power to introduce legislation pertaining to their portfolio,...

But if you disagree with my interpretation, please feel free to contact the GM.

The rapes by Hamas, real or imagained are irreleva[…]

@Rugoz You are a fuckin' moralist, Russia coul[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]