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: Pollution Controls
Details
Submitted by[?]: Protectorate 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: January 2424
Description[?]:
| Encouraging fewer sources of emissions |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on nuclear power.
Old value:: The decision is left up to local governments.
Current: The government encourages nuclear power (subsidies, tax relief etc).
Proposed: The government requires most energy to be generated by nuclear power.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning the use of pesticides.
Old value:: The government approves and regulates agricultural chemical use.
Current: Farmers are required to list chemicals used on their crops.
Proposed: Chemical pesticides, herbicides and fungicides are banned.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Funding of public transport (where applicable).
Old value:: Local governments decide upon the funding policy.
Current: Local governments decide upon the funding policy.
Proposed: Public transport is fully subsidised by the government.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:59:54, June 30, 2007 CET | From | Liberal Party of Malivia | To | Debating the Pollution Controls |
| Message | The SLP is opposed to: * The nationalisation proposed in article 1. * The universal ban proposed in article 3. * The change proposed in article 4. We feel that local government should have full jurisdiction. |
| Date | 23:04:08, June 30, 2007 CET | From | Supporters of Science in Design (IP) | To | Debating the Pollution Controls |
| Message | Article I hurts the nation's efficiency. Without the private sector to spur innovation, we will fall behind the rest of the world. |
| Date | 04:38:16, July 02, 2007 CET | From |  Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Pollution Controls |
| Message | We will concede that we could loose some of the innovation with article one. And provide we keep the same standards as are required in our state owned plants we agree that small scale plants can be added to the grid. Local control over public transport would be counter productive to our ban on autos, so we cannot compromise on that issue. There is little to no need for chemical treatment to control pests. The result is contamination of our waterways and wildlife. We would rather attention be devoted to modifying plants to discourage pests and of the use intelligent farming practices. |
| Date | 06:18:08, July 02, 2007 CET | From | Supporters of Science in Design (IP) | To | Debating the Pollution Controls |
| Message | With our concerns addressed, we shall vote yes. |
| Date | 10:09:11, July 04, 2007 CET | From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the Pollution Controls |
| Message | The SDP supports articles 1 and 3 but not 2. On balance we shall vote in favour. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 184 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 16 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to make a reasonable effort to be accurate when communicating the rules to other players. Any player who manipulatively misleads another player about the rules will be subject to sanction. |
| Random quote: "There is a mandate to impose a voluntary return to traditional values." - Ronald Reagan |