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: Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092
Details
Submitted by[?]: Lodamun Centre-Left Coalition
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill presents the formation of a cabinet. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. Traditionally, parties in the proposal vote yes, others (the opposition) vote no. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in and all parties in the proposal have voted yes, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline.
Voting deadline: May 2093
Description[?]:
| This Cabinet would be according to the Inclusive Consensus, with the three biggest parties holding two ministries and the rest one. |
Proposals
Article 1
As per the Constitution, the President of the Commonwealth chairs the cabinet.
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation
Article 3
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the CNT/AFL
Article 4
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the Democractic Socialist Party of Lodamun
Article 5
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the 
National People's Gang
Article 6
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the Adam Smith Party
Article 7
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Adam Smith Party
Article 8
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the Tuesday Is Coming
Article 9
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the Tuesday Is Coming
Article 10
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the National People's Gang
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 10:15:14, August 08, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | An interesting idea. We would support it if all parties agreed to the concept and committed to it long-term as a way of representing most accurately the wishes of the voters. However, the principle would need to be enshrined in legislation, most suitably as part of a relevant constitutional amendment. The danger otherwise is that any power-seekers among us would agree to consensus only until they are able to make a grab for more authority than their mandate allows by making pie-crust promises to gullible co-conspirators. |
| Date | 12:30:39, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Lodamun Centre-Left Coalition | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | We remind Equitista that there WAS legislation regarding the Inclusive Consensus Act which was so brutally ignored by the ASP, as the legislation apparently "expired". We hope the ASP would be willing to work in such a Cabinet. |
| Date | 16:38:33, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | The ICA legislation did not 'expire', nor did we brutally ignore it. It was explicitly revoked despiyte the libellous claims by other parties that we were breaking the law. http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=9292 "This bill would completely and totally revoke the Inclusive consensus act, which having served its purpose now is a mere restriction on expression in this nation." |
| Date | 20:12:05, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | As the population seem to be very evenly divided between the positions of the party (The low variation between first and last) we are willing to work this term with Equitista, on condition that they apologize for accusing the ASP of acting unconstiotutionally when we clearly did not. |
| Date | 23:57:57, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | we would be willing to be part of a consensus cabinet, but only if the ASP withdraws its attempt to dictate what other parties may and may not propose. If the ASP insists on its attempt to control debate even after its rejection by the voters, please remove us from the proposal. |
| Date | 01:32:07, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | We are only, in this bill requesting an apology for an unbased attack made by the Equitista party. If you are referring to our bill to make discrimination unconstitutional, we will withdraw any reference to yourselves as and when you stop trying to make discrimination institutionally acceptable. Is that OK with you? If not, then staying out of the government seems to be the best thing you could do. |
| Date | 01:50:19, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | The proposed head of government in this cabinet supports positive discrimation. You'll have to leave them out too. |
| Date | 02:41:54, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | Someone can support it fine. If they try to legalise it, we will object. In the past we always argued against it, now we have made our arguments stronger, that is all. Now it is going to be interesting to see how you vote here. |
| Date | 05:45:37, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | We support this bill as we find it better than our current cabinet. However we hope that it will soon be succeeded by another cabinet that we would prefer. |
| Date | 17:53:14, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | we are happy with the cabient that has been approved, so will oppose this. |
| Date | 21:22:42, August 09, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Inclusive Consensus Cabinet Proposal of April 2092 |
| Message | DSP, we request that you vote no, since there is already a suitable pan-left cabinet, including the PCL in place. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 149 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 239 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 62 |
| Random fact: If you are likely to be logging in to Particracy with the same IP address as another player with an active account, please inform Moderation on the forum. Otherwise your account could be inactivated on suspicion of multi-accounting. |
| Random quote: "I am loyal to the ideas, not to the institutions." - Cyro Aquila, former Selucian politician |