Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: November 5460
Next month in: 01:48:23
Server time: 10:11:36, March 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (0): Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: NMP Eminent Domain Bill

Details

Submitted by[?]: Democrats

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: March 2425

Description[?]:

We recognise that there are occasions when government projects may need to purchase private land in order for the project to go ahead. Therefore we believe that, if deemed vital (ie national security), then the government should be able to serve compulsory purchase orders.

However in order to ensure that such purchases are not abused, an independent panel would be established to work out compensation that is deemed fair to both parties.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date21:36:46, July 02, 2007 CET
FromUnited Republics Party
ToDebating the NMP Eminent Domain Bill
MessageURP used to back ideas such as this, but we no longer do.

Date21:37:57, July 02, 2007 CET
FromDemocrats
ToDebating the NMP Eminent Domain Bill
MessageThere is no excuse for irresponsible government, and the NMP now recognise this, therefore eminent domain must be allowed.

Date21:43:22, July 02, 2007 CET
FromUnited Republics Party
ToDebating the NMP Eminent Domain Bill
MessageFine, vote away. i can't explain how the URP gained seats and the NMP lost them, but proposing this will not solve your problems. I would have left you as Prime Minister, but you;ve been such a whining *itch since I called for new elections.

Date21:48:48, July 02, 2007 CET
FromDemocrats
ToDebating the NMP Eminent Domain Bill
MessageWe know how the URP gained seats, it is not exactly hard to find out, and we are working to solve our problems. As to whining, we have begun to agree with other parties as to the unappealing side of the URP. If we cannot trust our own government partners, then of course we can no longer work with them.

Date12:16:45, July 03, 2007 CET
FromCommunist Party of Lodamun
ToDebating the NMP Eminent Domain Bill
MessageSupport. This way I get to change my Eminent Domain Act.

Date10:14:49, July 06, 2007 CET
FromThe Unified Lodamun Party
ToDebating the NMP Eminent Domain Bill
MessageThe government has to much power in this bill. If we happen to elect corrupt officials by accident for a couple of years, they could easily abuse such power, and the courts are a part of the governemnt in the eyes of the ULP.

Date13:26:09, July 06, 2007 CET
FromDemocrats
ToDebating the NMP Eminent Domain Bill
MessageIn the eyes of ULP they are part of the government, however we feel there are enough checks here to ensure a homeowner, or landowner is not bing exploited by the state.

Date19:10:36, July 06, 2007 CET
FromIndependent Republican Party
ToDebating the NMP Eminent Domain Bill
MessageSupport. This system will provide fair compensation for land owners if a vital government work is needed on their land.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
     

Total Seats: 343

no
  

Total Seats: 208

abstain
  

Total Seats: 48


Random fact: Particracy does not allow official national flags of real-life nations or flags which are very prominent and recognisable (eg. the flags of the European Union, the United Nations, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or the Confederate States of America).

Random quote: "I think it's about time we voted for senators with breasts. After all, we've been voting for boobs long enough." - Clarie Sargent

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 74