Politics People
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Whole Day Download the Hansard
Friday Volume 637 16 March 2018 No. 112 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Friday 16 March 2018 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2018 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 1113 16 MARCH 2018 1114 De Cordova, Marsha McDonald, Stuart C. House of Commons Debbonaire, Thangam Merriman, Huw Dinenage, Caroline Milling, Amanda Docherty-Hughes, Martin Monaghan, Carol Friday 16 March 2018 Dodds, Anneliese Morris, David Donelan, Michelle Morton, Wendy The House met at half-past Nine o’clock Dowden, Oliver Nandy, Lisa Duffield, Rosie Neill, Robert Edwards, Jonathan Newlands, Gavin PRAYERS Ellman, Mrs Louise Nokes, rh Caroline Farron, Tim O’Hara, Brendan Field, rh Mark Owen, Albert [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] Fletcher, Colleen Pennycook, Matthew Foster, Kevin Philp, Chris 9.34 am Foxcroft, Vicky Pincher, Christopher Freer, Mike Pollard, Luke Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP): I beg to Furniss, Gill Pound, Stephen move, That the House sit in private. Gaffney, Hugh Pow, Rebecca Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 163). Gardiner, Barry Pursglove, Tom The House proceeded to a Division. Gethins, Stephen Quin, Jeremy Gibb, rh Nick Reeves, Ellie Gibson, Patricia Robinson, Mary Mr Speaker: Will the Serjeant at Arms please investigate Grady, Patrick Saville Roberts, Liz the delay in the Aye Lobby, which I have reason to Grant, Peter Shelbrooke, Alec believe is not heavily populated? Green, Chris Sheppard, -
Electoral Reform in Canada: the Shape of Things to Come an Executive Summary March 2016
Electoral Reform in Canada: The Shape of Things to Come An Executive Summary March 2016 We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first- past- the- post voting system. As part of a national engagement process, we will ensure that electoral reform measures—such as ranked ballots, proportional representation, mandatory voting, and online voting—are fully and fairly studied and considered .... Within 18 months of forming government, we will bring forward legislation to enact electoral reform. —Justin Trudeau, Real Change: A Fair and Open Government ABOUT THIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Public Services Foundation of Canada and the National Union of Public and General Employees have prepared a comprehensive discussion paper based on a survey of the literature and polling and focus group results, which will be published at a later date. This executive summary provides an overview of the main points without the inclusion of the research, position paper, or polling results. Electoral Reform in Canada: The Shape of Things to Come Executive Summary The Canadian Debate Justin Trudeau promised during the election that this would be the last federal election to use the unfair first-past-the-post (FPTP) system. Although he has indicated that other voting systems would be considered, Trudeau has indicated that his preferred proposal is a version of the single transferable vote (STV) that uses a ranked ballot. His critics say that when STV is used in single member ridings, it is really just an alternative vote (AV) system, also known as an instant run-off system, and the result would be even more unfair in its outcome than FPTP. -
THE 422 Mps WHO BACKED the MOTION Conservative 1. Bim
THE 422 MPs WHO BACKED THE MOTION Conservative 1. Bim Afolami 2. Peter Aldous 3. Edward Argar 4. Victoria Atkins 5. Harriett Baldwin 6. Steve Barclay 7. Henry Bellingham 8. Guto Bebb 9. Richard Benyon 10. Paul Beresford 11. Peter Bottomley 12. Andrew Bowie 13. Karen Bradley 14. Steve Brine 15. James Brokenshire 16. Robert Buckland 17. Alex Burghart 18. Alistair Burt 19. Alun Cairns 20. James Cartlidge 21. Alex Chalk 22. Jo Churchill 23. Greg Clark 24. Colin Clark 25. Ken Clarke 26. James Cleverly 27. Thérèse Coffey 28. Alberto Costa 29. Glyn Davies 30. Jonathan Djanogly 31. Leo Docherty 32. Oliver Dowden 33. David Duguid 34. Alan Duncan 35. Philip Dunne 36. Michael Ellis 37. Tobias Ellwood 38. Mark Field 39. Vicky Ford 40. Kevin Foster 41. Lucy Frazer 42. George Freeman 43. Mike Freer 44. Mark Garnier 45. David Gauke 46. Nick Gibb 47. John Glen 48. Robert Goodwill 49. Michael Gove 50. Luke Graham 51. Richard Graham 52. Bill Grant 53. Helen Grant 54. Damian Green 55. Justine Greening 56. Dominic Grieve 57. Sam Gyimah 58. Kirstene Hair 59. Luke Hall 60. Philip Hammond 61. Stephen Hammond 62. Matt Hancock 63. Richard Harrington 64. Simon Hart 65. Oliver Heald 66. Peter Heaton-Jones 67. Damian Hinds 68. Simon Hoare 69. George Hollingbery 70. Kevin Hollinrake 71. Nigel Huddleston 72. Jeremy Hunt 73. Nick Hurd 74. Alister Jack (Teller) 75. Margot James 76. Sajid Javid 77. Robert Jenrick 78. Jo Johnson 79. Andrew Jones 80. Gillian Keegan 81. Seema Kennedy 82. Stephen Kerr 83. Mark Lancaster 84. -
Electoral Reform “Regardless of Electoral System, There Will Always
Electoral Reform “Regardless of electoral system, there will always be opposing views as to advantages and disadvantages of each” Submitted by SR-F 06 September 2016 Because elections and referenda require a high level of voter awareness and responsibility, civic participation in governance must be encouraged in order that Canada’s Democracy becomes one that protects liberties, particularly communal liberties, rather than simply emphasizing individual Rights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMIbH5D0waA Direct Democracy would be the ideal voting system because it allows citizens to participate in most every aspect of governance through initiatives/voting/referenda... laws and changes to the national constitution being voted on by the citizenry affording them a much greater measure of control over political minutiae. Switzerland is the most prominent modern democracy to use elements of Direct Democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland with versions of it at State and local levels in the USA. As opposed to direct democracy, some version of Representative Democracy , founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people (includes Referendum/Initiatives/Recall that provide limited Direct Democracy), would appear to be more practical for Canada at this point in time. Present System : FPTP - Plurality In “winner-take-all" electoral systems, generally just two parties end up competing in national elections, forcing political discussions into a narrow two-party frame where loyalty and party line assertions can distort political debate, voters left undecided as to where to place their vote. When FPTP Voters realise that their preferred candidate cannot win, knowing that their vote won’t count or will be wasted, they have little incentive to vote. -
FDN-274688 Disclosure
FDN-274688 Disclosure MP Total Adam Afriyie 5 Adam Holloway 4 Adrian Bailey 7 Alan Campbell 3 Alan Duncan 2 Alan Haselhurst 5 Alan Johnson 5 Alan Meale 2 Alan Whitehead 1 Alasdair McDonnell 1 Albert Owen 5 Alberto Costa 7 Alec Shelbrooke 3 Alex Chalk 6 Alex Cunningham 1 Alex Salmond 2 Alison McGovern 2 Alison Thewliss 1 Alistair Burt 6 Alistair Carmichael 1 Alok Sharma 4 Alun Cairns 3 Amanda Solloway 1 Amber Rudd 10 Andrea Jenkyns 9 Andrea Leadsom 3 Andrew Bingham 6 Andrew Bridgen 1 Andrew Griffiths 4 Andrew Gwynne 2 Andrew Jones 1 Andrew Mitchell 9 Andrew Murrison 4 Andrew Percy 4 Andrew Rosindell 4 Andrew Selous 10 Andrew Smith 5 Andrew Stephenson 4 Andrew Turner 3 Andrew Tyrie 8 Andy Burnham 1 Andy McDonald 2 Andy Slaughter 8 FDN-274688 Disclosure Angela Crawley 3 Angela Eagle 3 Angela Rayner 7 Angela Smith 3 Angela Watkinson 1 Angus MacNeil 1 Ann Clwyd 3 Ann Coffey 5 Anna Soubry 1 Anna Turley 6 Anne Main 4 Anne McLaughlin 3 Anne Milton 4 Anne-Marie Morris 1 Anne-Marie Trevelyan 3 Antoinette Sandbach 1 Barry Gardiner 9 Barry Sheerman 3 Ben Bradshaw 6 Ben Gummer 3 Ben Howlett 2 Ben Wallace 8 Bernard Jenkin 45 Bill Wiggin 4 Bob Blackman 3 Bob Stewart 4 Boris Johnson 5 Brandon Lewis 1 Brendan O'Hara 5 Bridget Phillipson 2 Byron Davies 1 Callum McCaig 6 Calum Kerr 3 Carol Monaghan 6 Caroline Ansell 4 Caroline Dinenage 4 Caroline Flint 2 Caroline Johnson 4 Caroline Lucas 7 Caroline Nokes 2 Caroline Spelman 3 Carolyn Harris 3 Cat Smith 4 Catherine McKinnell 1 FDN-274688 Disclosure Catherine West 7 Charles Walker 8 Charlie Elphicke 7 Charlotte -
Proxy Voting: Review of Pilot Arrangements
House of Commons Procedure Committee Proxy voting: review of pilot arrangements Fourth Report of Session 2019–21 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 7 September 2020 HC 10 Published on 10 September 2020 by authority of the House of Commons Procedure Committee The Procedure Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to consider the practice and procedure of the House in the conduct of public business, and to make recommendations. Current membership Karen Bradley MP (Conservative, Staffordshire Moorlands) (Chair) Kirsty Blackman MP (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen North) Jack Brereton MP (Conservative, Stoke-on-Trent South) Bambos Charalambous MP (Labour, Enfield, Southgate) Sir Christopher Chope MP (Conservative, Christchurch) Ms Angela Eagle MP (Labour, Wallasey) Chris Elmore MP (Labour, Ogmore) James Gray MP (Conservative, North Wiltshire) Andrew Griffith MP (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs) Kevan Jones MP (Labour, North Durham) Nigel Mills MP (Conservative, Amber Valley) Rob Roberts MP (Conservative, Delyn) Douglas Ross MP (Conservative, Moray) James Sunderland MP (Conservative, Bracknell) Owen Thompson MP (Scottish National Party, Midlothian) Liz Twist MP (Labour, Blaydon) Suzanne Webb MP (Conservative, Stourbridge) Powers The powers of the Committee are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No. 147. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019. This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament Licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/copyright. Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website and in print by Order of the House. -
Economy & Autonomy Blairfare: , Third-Way Disability and Dependency in Britain Introduction in This Paper We Intend to Explo
Economy & Autonomy Blairfare: , Third-Way Disability and Dependency in Britain Jennifer Harris University of Central Lancashire, UK BobSapey Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK John Stewart Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK Introduction In this paper we intend to explore the social policy changes in relation to disabled people which are taking place in the United Kingdom, particularly since the election of the Labour government on May 1, 1997. We intend to first examine the key differences between this govern- ment and previous administrations and then to describe the policy changes which have occurred. We shall describe certain historical aspects of British social policy which are relevant to our analysis, a description that itself will involve an evaluation of the power structures that are emerging. The term which has been commonly used to describe this government's approach to economic and social policy is the "third way" and, while we acknowledge the value of this term in that it implies an alternative to either a collectivist or anti-collectivist approach to welfare (George and Wilding 1976), we have chosen to describe the policies we are examining as "Blairfare." This term, a combination of Prime Minister Tony Blair's last name and welfare, is intended to signify the rather personal character of "the third way" in Britain. Globalisation and the Nation-State For the past couple of years, the United Kingdom has had a Labour government but, unlike the experience of previous Labour and Conservative administrations, under the leadership of Prime Minister Blair we have been witnessing one of the greatest constitutional shake-ups this century. -
Electoral Rules and Democratic Electoral Rules, and Governance Democratic Governance Edited by Mala Htun and G
Report of the Political Science, Task Force on Electoral Rules and Democratic Electoral Rules, and Governance Democratic Governance Edited by Mala Htun and G. Bingham Powell, Jr. AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE AssOCIATION n TasK FORCE REPORT, SEPTEMBER 2013 Political Science, Electoral Rules, and Democratic Governance Report of the Task Force on Electoral Rules and Democratic Governance Edited by Mala Htun and G. Bingham Powell, Jr. SEPTEMBER 2013 AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE AssOCIATION 1527 New Hampshire Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036-1206 Copyright © 2013 by the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved. ISBN: 978-1-878147-41-7 Task Force on Electoral Rules and Democratic Governance Task Force Members Mala Htun, University of New Mexico, Chair G. Bingham Powell, Jr., University of Rochester; President, APSA, 2011–12 John Carey, Dartmouth College Karen E. Ferree, University of California, San Diego Simon Hix, London School of Economics Mona Lena Krook, Rutgers University Robert G. Moser, University of Texas, Austin Shaheen Mozaffar, Bridgewater State University Andrew Rehfeld, Washington University in St. Louis Andrew Reynolds, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Ethan Scheiner, University of California, Davis Melissa Schwartzberg, Columbia University Matthew S. Shugart, University of California, Davis ii American Political Science Assocation Table of Contents TASK FORCE MEMBERS ............................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF -
UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations
UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The Party Politics of Political Decentralization Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6jw6f00k Author Wainfan, Kathryn Tanya Publication Date 2018 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles The Party Politics of Political Decentralization A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science by Kathryn Tanya Wainfan 2018 c Copyright by Kathryn Tanya Wainfan 2018 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION The Party Politics of Political Decentralization by Kathryn Tanya Wainfan Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Los Angeles, 2018 Professor Michael F. Thies, Chair In this dissertation, I ask why certain types of parties would agree to support creating or empowering sub-national governments. In particular, I focus on nationalized parties { those that gain support from throughout a country. Political decentralization can negatively impact nationalized parties in at least two ways. First, it reduces the amount of power a party can enjoy should it win control of the national-level government. Second, previous studies show that political decentralization can increase party denationalization, meaning regional parties gain more support, even during national-level elections. I argue that nationalized parties may support decentralization when doing so reduces the ideological conflicts over national-level policy among voters whose support they seek. By altering political institutions, a party may be able to accommodate differing policy prefer- ences in different parts of the country, or limit the damage to the party's electoral fortunes such differences could create. -
Democracy in the Age of Pandemic – Fair Vote UK Report June 2020
Democracy in the Age of Pandemic How to Safeguard Elections & Ensure Government Continuity APPENDICES fairvote.uk Published June 2020 Appendix 1 - 86 1 Written Evidence, Responses to Online Questionnaire During the preparation of this report, Fair Vote UK conducted a call for written evidence through an online questionnaire. The questionnaire was open to all members of the public. This document contains the unedited responses from that survey. The names and organisations for each entry have been included in the interest of transparency. The text of the questionnaire is found below. It indicates which question each response corresponds to. Name Organisation (if applicable) Question 1: What weaknesses in democratic processes has Covid-19 highlighted? Question 2: Are you aware of any good articles/publications/studies on this subject? Or of any countries/regions that have put in place mediating practices that insulate it from the social distancing effects of Covid-19? Question 3: Do you have any ideas on how to address democratic shortcomings exposed by the impact of Covid-19? Appendix 1 - 86 2 Appendix 1 Name S. Holledge Organisation Question 1 Techno-phobia? Question 2 Estonia's e-society Question 3 Use technology and don't be frightened by it 2 Appendix 1 - 86 3 Appendix 2 Name S. Page Organisation Yes for EU (Scotland) Question 1 The Westminster Parliament is not fit for purpose Question 2 Scottish Parliament Question 3 Use the internet and electronic voting 3 Appendix 1 - 86 4 Appendix 3 Name J. Sanders Organisation emergency legislation without scrutiny removing civil liberties railroading powers through for example changes to mental health act that impact on individual rights (A) Question 1 I live in Wales, and commend Mark Drakeford for his quick response to the crisis by enabling the Assembly to continue to meet and debate online Question 2 no, not until you asked. -
ELECTING the FIRST PARLIAMENT Party Competition and Voter Participation in Scotland
PARTY POLITICS VOL 10. No.2 pp. 213–233 Copyright © 2004 SAGE Publications London Thousand Oaks New Delhi www.sagepublications.com ELECTING THE FIRST PARLIAMENT Party Competition and Voter Participation in Scotland Steven E. Galatas ABSTRACT Theory regarding turnout in elections suggests that voters are more likely to vote when their vote could be decisive. The article provides a generalized test of the relationship between the likelihood of turning out and the closeness of elections. Data are single-member district (first- past-the-post) and regional (party list) constituency-level results from the Scottish Parliament election of 1999. Scotland provides an excellent case because the 1999 Scottish Parliament was elected using a combi- nation of single-member districts, plus an additional member, regional list alternative vote system. In addition, the Scottish Parliament election was characterized by regional, multiparty competition. Controlling for other factors, the article finds that closeness counts and relates to higher levels of voter participation in the Scottish Parliament elections. This finding holds for single-member district (first-past-the-post) constituen- cies and additional member regional lists. KEY WORDS electoral competition Scottish Parliament voter turnout In 1999, Scottish voters went to the polls for the first time to elect a Scottish Parliament. Although Scotland had a legislative body prior to the Treaty of Union of 1707, the new Parliament created in 1999 was the first democrat- ically elected Scottish Parliament. Elections to the Scottish Parliament featured a deviation from the single-member district-plurality system (SMD-P) familiar to Scottish voters from other electoral contests. Instead, voters selected Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) using an additional member system (AMS). -
Daily Report Friday, 20 March 2015 CONTENTS
Daily Report Friday, 20 March 2015 This report shows written answers and statements provided on 20 March 2015 and the information is correct at the time of publication (03:38 P.M., 20 March 2015). For the latest information on written questions and answers, ministerial corrections, and written statements, please visit: http://www.parliament.uk/writtenanswers/ CONTENTS ANSWERS 4 CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT 12 BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND Football: Qatar 12 SKILLS 4 DEFENCE 12 Adult Education 4 Air Force: Cadets 12 Adult Education: North East 4 Armed Forces: Safety 12 Adult Education: West Midlands 4 HMS Victory 13 Adult Education: Yorkshire and Reserve Forces 13 the Humber 5 Tornado Aircraft 13 Conditions of Employment 5 USA 14 Further Education 6 EDUCATION 14 Higher Education: Bradford 6 Absent Parents 14 Intellectual Property 7 Children: Day Care 15 Technology: Apprentices 8 Conditions of Employment 16 CABINET OFFICE 8 Free School Meals 16 Conditions of Employment 8 Free Schools 17 Research 8 Research 17 Technology: New Businesses 8 School Leaving 18 COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT 9 Schools: Admissions 18 Affordable Housing: Blackpool 9 Teachers 19 Housing: Blackpool 9 Teachers: Standards 19 Housing: Construction 10 ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE 20 Non-domestic Rates: Lancashire 10 Electricity: Prices 20 Social Rented Housing: Energy Supply 20 Blackpool 11 Green Deal Scheme 20 2 Friday, 20 March 2015 Daily Report Natural Gas: Prices 21 TREASURY 39 Offshore Industry 21 Corporation Tax 39 ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL Electronic Cigarettes: Taxation