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: The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Sebastian Flyte Party
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: September 2381
Description[?]:
| The idea of this Bill is as follows: Article One is not about reducing the choice of the child or the parent it is about ensuring that all Hobrazian children get the same education. It helps make sure that all children are taught the same things by qualified professionals. We beleieve that keeping people in education untill they are 18 is wrong. We believe that at 16 they should have the choice to either discontinue or continue their educational pursuits. We also believe that the reduction in compulsory education age will bring more competition into the labour market. That is what Article Two is about. Article Three is attempting to change the disciplinary system of our education system. It is not about mindless beatings, it is about punishment for wrong behaviour. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Education for children under adult age.
Old value:: Education is compulsory, but home schooling is permitted.
Current: Education is compulsory, but home schooling is permitted.
Proposed: Education is compulsory and has to happen at school.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The age until which students, if education were to be compulsary, are required to be educated (limited between 16 and 21).
Old value:: 18
Current: 18
Proposed: 16
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The teacher's right to discipline children.
Old value:: Teachers are forbidden from striking children and may only use non-contact discipline (detention, expulsion etc).
Current: Teachers are forbidden from striking children and may only use non-contact discipline (detention, expulsion etc).
Proposed: Discipline levels are set by local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:52:44, March 23, 2007 CET | From |  We Say So! Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | We support article 1, but do not support article 2. The reasons for this are shown through the current education laws which can be found via the following link: http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=9964 |
| Date | 19:17:48, March 23, 2007 CET | From | Sebastian Flyte Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | We will not remove article two as we believe that it is unfair to keep people in education untill the age of 18 |
| Date | 19:20:26, March 23, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | Okay, you've added two more articles... We support article 4 but not article 3. Subsidising tuition costs a lot of money for the government with no guarantees of return on investment. The current system allows for all students to receive subsidised tuition (increasing depending upon available income) and to repay that money back over time so long as their income is above a minimum amount allowing that money to be fed back into the education system for future generations. See: http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=12258 |
| Date | 19:22:56, March 23, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | "we believe that it is unfair to keep people in education untill the age of 18" - How so? Leaving school at 16 increases the pressures on those of a young age without any guarantees of work being available. The current law allows for those pupils wishing to not be involved in academics to be trained, and paid, for certain work whilst still within the protective bubble of a scholastic environment. |
| Date | 19:29:31, March 23, 2007 CET | From | Sebastian Flyte Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | But for those who do not want to remain in education? Do you think of those? No! I will remove article 3, as it is purely an economical reason for it not working. |
| Date | 19:31:21, March 23, 2007 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | We can support articles 3 and 1, on the condition that children with special needs (e.g. autism, mental handicaps, etc.) are provided adequate care. |
| Date | 19:33:28, March 23, 2007 CET | From | Sebastian Flyte Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | Yes. I believe that they should recieve special care, or that they should attend special schools. |
| Date | 19:45:56, March 23, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | "But for those who do not want to remain in education? Do you think of those? No! " - Have you looked at the bill linked to? If you had you would clearly see that those not wishing to remain in full time education can access Vocasional and Apprenticeship training. We would also ask why a child aged 16 should be any different to one aged 14, or 12? They are children, not adults, so why should they come under adult legislation? Moreover we would like quote ourselves from a previous debate: "The extra 2 years of education would be used to prepare people for the future, whatever type of employment they should wish for, in an environment to which they are already acostomed. Post 16 education would consist (for those 2 years) of those students being able to try differing forms of employment in a apprenticeship format or, should students wish to continue on to University, a scholastic format. It would also mean that students would be more highly educated, providing those educated within the Hobrazian school system an automatic advantage over those of other Countries, would will be extremely beneficial to us when we finally get the economic system in place." We would also point out that lowering this age increases the numbers of people within the job market so making it harder for those in employment to keep their jobs or find new work. |
| Date | 22:01:27, March 23, 2007 CET | From |  Liberal Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | We are staunchly opposed. We will not support the removal of choice in how children are educated. |
| Date | 00:44:03, March 24, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | Could we perhaps request a bill description for this, so we might better understand what it is exactly the SFP thinks will change or be an improvement by changing these laws? |
| Date | 14:35:50, March 25, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | We still fail to understand why children aged 16 should be given special dispensation compared to any other children of any other age. The additional 2 years of education prepares them specifically for the work place or university and losing that time would be detrimental to both them and the work force as a whole. Introducing more people in the work force will merely force down wages as their would be an increase in the numbers of people attempting to gain fulltime employment in lower skilled jobs. |
| Date | 11:56:49, March 27, 2007 CET | From | Sebastian Flyte Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | Yes, it increases competition in the workplace, AND it gives them a choice. |
| Date | 12:21:53, March 28, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the The Sebastian Flyte Education Bill |
| Message | But without guaranteeing work or wages so forcing wages of the whole downward. The choice already exists, but in a secure environment. What this would do is remove that security and place children at the whim of market forces without giving them time to prepare additional, specific skills and only increases the number of people wanting work without any concern as to the amount of jobs available. We say again, how is a child of 16 any different to a child of 14? They are both children and are not recognised as anything different before the law so why remove all security from them? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 80 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 91 | ||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 229 |
| Random fact: Never use the same password as a friend. If two or more active accounts use the same password, they will be inactivated. |
| Random quote: "We’ve got to stand with our North Korean allies." - Sarah Palin |