I’d like to motion that voting for this bill be canceled under Article 1.7 of the Legislative Procedure Act. Belschaft’s examples make a great case for this bill- the problem is that they’re not included in the bill. Instead, he opted to link to the process used in the UK for determining the intent behind a vote, which doesn’t really apply here in TSP where we use different voting systems to the UK. All this bill does is set us up for more arguments and legislation later down the line. It does marginally fix the issues it sets out to, but it fixes the problem by creating more problems. We can incorporate the examples into the bill and put it back up for vote later.
Sorry, just to clarify–we are not voting on the original bill that was linked directly to the UK process. We are voting on the revised version that omitted those references. Right?
Oh, I see. My point still stands, though. We need examples.
The reason provided has been deemed sufficient by the Chair. However, in order for voting to be cancelled, the original motion must be seconded, after this, there will be a 24hr wait period in which other members may be given the opportunity to object to this motion. If no objections are raised, then voting shall be cancelled.
1 Like
Seconded.
1 Like
The two motions are recognised and voting shall be cancelled at 2024-08-11T14:39:00Z, as long as no other legislators object to this motion.
I object to the motion to cancel voting.
I understand that some legislators have issues with the draft that was motioned, which is a legitimate position to have, but this is not a situation where the matter at hand is so urgent and consequential that the vote must be cancelled ahead of its natural conclusion. The Chair should therefore allow the Assembly to have a chance to express its view on the bill at hand, after which the legislative process can continue with a new bill if those legislators so choose.
I second that objection.
Further, as the bill is slated (at this moment) to fail the vote, no harm comes by allowing the vote to expire on its own. Furtherstill, nothing stops the Assembly from continuing discussion while the vote is ongoing.
The motion is recognised by the Chair, as the motion to cancel has been objected to by another Assembly member, voting will continue and end at its original pre-defined date and time.
2024-08-14T20:55:00Z.
As I have mentioned on Discord, I didn’t feel that it was necessary to provide specific examples of how ballots should be adjudicated, as it was unlikely that I could predict every single possible set of circumstances that could cause a ballot to be considered doubtful and over time an established precedent would come into existence via the decisions of the EC and any subsequent rulings issues by the Court - this is how guidance for ballot adjudication is developed in real life.
Writing up formal guidance for adjudication is something that I am capable of doing, and if that is what people want I can do so, but it would be based primarily on my own understanding of the process and UKEC guidance as the later is what I work with IRL - UK electoral systems and processes being what I am most familiar and experienced with.