We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Let's keep it clean
Details
Submitted by[?]: Likaton Coalition of the Willing
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: August 2376
Description[?]:
| We wish to see the national treasures of our beautiful nation looked after by the people who benefit most from their presence; the local folks. Article 1: We currently manage national parks and marine areas through central government. Whilst this has it's advantages, we feel that there is a risk of government 'playing the numbers'. and not giving each area the love it deserves. To safeguard our nations beauty, however, we propose three key safeguards: i) Each Prefecture must maintain a specified quota of land and water area, based on current provision. ii) A national inspectorate will be established to monitor each prefecture. The Federal Active Conservation Trust, will supply grants for those that manage their resources carefully, and fiscal penalties for those that fail to support these resources. iii) Any area recognised as either the habitat of an endangered species of flora or fauna, or as a site or international special interest, for historical or aesthetic reasons, will be directly managed by FACT. Article 2: As part of this initiative, FACT will set each prefecture a quota for lumber retrieval, and for forestry re-planting, to be managed by the local forestry commission. Article 3: Where there is need, each prefecture will have the power to restrict or prohibit recreational drugs. Central governemtn will not interfere, but we hope that this can be the first step to outlawing harmful substances. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Forest management.
Old value:: There is a national agency which owns and manages all forest land.
Current: There is a national agency which owns and manages all forest land.
Proposed: Local governments are required to operate forestry agencies, which own and manage all forest land.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Government policy regarding a national park system.
Old value:: The government funds and maintains a network of national parks and/or marine protected areas.
Current: The government funds and maintains a network of national parks and/or marine protected areas.
Proposed: The government devolves park policy to local governments.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The recreational drug policy.
Old value:: All naturally occurring drugs are legal.
Current: There are no laws regulating what citizens can put into their bodies.
Proposed: Recreational drug use is regulated by local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:09:39, March 18, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Let's keep it clean |
| Message | We are going to have to learn more languages... just so we can increase the number of ways in which we can say no to proposals like this. |
| Date | 01:57:33, March 18, 2007 CET | From |  Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the Let's keep it clean |
| Message | The AMSuD Partei seem to eager to write off legislation without debate...but we are confident that the rest of the Convocation will see the sense in these proposals. |
| Date | 04:06:10, March 18, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Let's keep it clean |
| Message | Okay - let us rephrase that. Local governments are on limited budgets, often close to bankrupt - unless they are truly exceptional. Real world experience suggests that they are not exceptional. Under those circumstances, given open hand on authority, and no restraint on responsibility - it is only a matter of time before the bankrupt (and the morally bankrupt) are going to be willing to trade short-term relief, for 'local' loss. The 'local' forests cut for timber, the 'local' parks sold for development. The problem is - like we said - these people are not the exceptions. When you place this kind of authority in the hands of local supervision, without the support (and, yes - the threat) of global responsibility, you end up with a global loss of all the 'local' resources. In other words: "We are going to have to learn more languages... just so we can increase the number of ways in which we can say no to proposals like this". |
| Date | 04:09:49, March 18, 2007 CET | From | Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the Let's keep it clean |
| Message | We are grateful that the AMSuD Partei have rephrased for clarity. We have more faith in our trusty local councilment, though. |
| Date | 06:39:16, March 18, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Let's keep it clean |
| Message | We, on the other hand, have little faith in local government collectively. Individuals councils may prove to be exceptional, but collectively, they won't. Practically by definition. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 102 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 476 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 88 |
| Random fact: If your "Bills under debate" section is cluttered up with old bills created by inactive parties, report them for deletion on the Bill Clearouts Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4363 |
| Random quote: "The honest politician is one who, when he is bought, stays bought." - Simon Cameron |