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: Energy Freedom Act II
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal Party
Status[?]: passed
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: October 2376
Description[?]:
A bill to increase individual freedoms and to reduce the size of government. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on the nation's power grid.
Old value:: The national grid is fully owned by the state.
Current: Multiple private companies each own and maintain sections of the national power grid.
Proposed: Multiple private companies each own and maintain sections of the national power grid.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 23:09:26, March 18, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Energy Freedom Act II |
Message | This does nothing to increase freedom and increases disparity within the National Grid. The current system allows for maintenance to be carried out to a singular high level whilst maintaining cost effectiveness as the grid is maintained as a single entity. Splitting the grid merely introduces problems in maintenance whilst also increasing the overall costs incurred by those companies maitaining the grid as they are unable to take into account economies of scale. Moreover, multiple companies owning the grid increases disparity for consumers in both service provision and price whilst not improving the quality of service, nor does this bill attempt to guarantee this quality of service. It is also improper of the Government to sell vital infrastructure and leaving it to the whim of market forces, which cannot be trusted to guarantee quality. |
Date | 23:16:30, March 18, 2007 CET | From | Liberal Party | To | Debating the Energy Freedom Act II |
Message | This bill gives us choice in how our power needs are delivered. Hobrazians are free to move anywhere in this country and the companies will be forced to be competitive our else people will move elsewhere for a better service. It is the position of this party that market forces are what ensures quality at cheap prices, and that the government is a hindrance to this. |
Date | 23:33:12, March 18, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Energy Freedom Act II |
Message | Market forces have been shown to not provide any form of social conscience and are interested in only increasing profit margins to the detriment of the consumer. We would point out that cheap does not equal good. In regards peoples freedom of movement, whilst we agree and encourage the free movement of our people, it is not always possible for people to move due to concerns other than those of pure economics. In this regard, people must know that they will be able to have access to high quality, well maintained services wherever they are within this Country. Relying on private companies to do this would be foolish and it is the duty of government to guarantee that these services are available to all. We also point out the foolishness of privatising vital infrastructure which allow private companies to hold this Country, and this Government, to ransom without any guarantee of service quality. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||
yes |
Total Seats: 178 | ||
no |
Total Seats: 118 | ||
abstain |
Total Seats: 104 |
Random fact: Any RP law granting extraordinary "emergency powers" or dictator-like powers to a government must be passed by at least a 2/3rds majority, but (like all RP laws) may always be overturned by a simple majority vote of the legislature. |
Random quote: "The sun, the moon and the stars would have disappeared long ago had they happened to be within the reach of predatory human hands." - Havelock Ellis |