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: Public Services Modernisation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Liberal Alliance
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: January 2098
Description[?]:
| As most of you will be aware, we believe that the private sector can guarantee a far higher standard of public services than the state can afford to provide. We therefore believe that healthcare and education should be run by private companies who can provide cutting edge services and with those who can afford to pay, making a contribution to these services to ensure there continued upgrading. However, we also believe that these companies must adhere to national standards and we believe obviously that everyone regardless of their income has a right to use these services and so we believe that it is the state's role and duty to oversee and regulate these companies and to guarantee that all people have acess to the healthcare and education option of their choice. Therefore the state will pay for the education and healthcare of those unable to pay for it themselves. This is to be determined by means testing, with anyone below a certain income threshold (to be discussed) being eligible for state payment. The state will also continue to fund a number of charter schools for the forseeable future as an interim measure to ensure high quality education provision for all. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Health care policy.
Old value:: There is a free public health care system and a small number of private clinics, which are heavily regulated to ensure they treat their patients well and provide good care.
Current: Health care is entirely public and free; private clinics are banned.
Proposed: Health care is private, but is paid for by the state for people with low incomes.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Higher education institutions.
Old value:: The government maintains a system of universities, vocational schools, and colleges nationwide.
Current: The government maintains a system of universities, vocational schools, and colleges nationwide.
Proposed: The government does not maintain any forms of higher education.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The regulation of higher education.
Old value:: The government allows private higher education but regulates it to meet nationally set standards.
Current: The government allows public and private higher education institutions to coexist with self-regulation for those that are private.
Proposed: The government does not fund any public higher education institutions, permitting only private higher education institutions to exist.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Pre-school education.
Old value:: The government maintains a system of free publically owned nurseries alongside heavily regulated private establishments.
Current: The government maintains a system of free publically owned nursery and pre-school educational centres.
Proposed: The government leaves development of nurseries to the private sector.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The education system.
Old value:: There is a free public education system and a small number of private schools, which are heavily regulated to ensure they teach adequate skills and information.
Current: There is a free public education system alongside private schools.
Proposed: Education is private, but the government issues vouchers to pay for the schooling of disadvantaged children.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:49:31, August 15, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Why are ypou intent on crushing the poor and disenfranchised into the GROUND? Bottom Up: Vouchers lead to discrimination as higher class schools rejject those that are poor. Why? So that poor mothers have a hard time finding work and breaking even with child care costs? Why privatized Education!?! The private sector is geared only towards profit and will not care about anything taht truly matters in education. And once again, the poor are discriminated against. Why not? National unbiversities can be held to national standards, raising our affluency, literacy and our GDP as more people can pursue education. Many doctors discriminate if a patient is from a poorer region. many doctors feel that their payment by the government is a jip from their normal payments.\ Want to kick any bums as you walk out of the building? There are some chilfdren starving somewhere, want to laugh and eat a hot dog in front of them? You are SICK. |
| Date | 01:13:07, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Nacionalnogo Progressa | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | It is your best speech! Great. |
| Date | 01:16:37, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Yes, well this bill is an attempt to roll back all the progress we've made in his absence. I was fairly enraged when he called it modernisation. |
| Date | 02:51:56, August 16, 2005 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | PMP you see not to understand. Government will still regulate these establishments they will just be run by the private sector. Also, your argument about discrimination against poor people on vouchers is just not true. The government will undertake to pay the same amount as others for treatment or education with schools being 'needs blind' in admissions ensuring that all children may go to the school of their choice it is simply thaqt the government rahter than parents etc. picks up the tab for those who are disadvantaged and por. there is no discrimination or underfunding. People still have acees to education undder this system they simply have acess to better education and facilites than they do at the moment, so further raising the affluency, literacy and GDP that you profess to want to see. |
| Date | 03:56:37, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Starting from the top: I think it is you who doesn't understand. If you don't completely control it these private schools, there will be great amounts of discrimination against the poor and ethnic minorities. The admninistrator may formulate some reason to reject Jose, but it was because of his parentage. Students who bring vouchers will be discriminated against, it happens with food stamps and Medicaid. And quotas are abhorrent. Everyone should be on an equal standing upon setting foot in the school. Ah, lets favor and the rich. Aristocracy is great! The rich get access to the best schools while Jose goes to an until recently government funded school, makes all As and still is refused into the posh university that Little Rich Boy got into not on merit but on parentage.The government is already picking up the tab, no one should get a better education simply because of who their parents are. People do not get better access, the rich do while the poor languish in the worst underfunbded schools. A national system can help to equalize income equality within the school. Your Education Corporations will see no profit in inner city schools. Look, a bum. Taunt him. It was his fault that privately funded schools failed to give him the best education possibly, and his fault he was replaced by a richer student who got to the best of schools on Daddy's bill, not his merit. |
| Date | 13:32:09, August 16, 2005 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | If you are concerned about discrimination, then a lot of that can be dealt with by using a 'blind' admissions system, with aplication forms not carying any personal information about parentage etc. or the income and financial situation. Indeed it could in fact be run by a government agency with the schools only getting 'codes' for each applicant thereby ensuring that even the name and address of the applicant need not be given to the school. Then, once in the government would simply pay the fees rahter than parents and many schools would have bursery schemes to help poorer students. If necessary, tax incentives etc. can be given to encourage the establishment of schools in inner city areas and those in richer areas could subsidise those in poorer ones - though as the government pays the fees I see no reason why corporations could not make profits in these areas and for the moment, charter schools will remain. You mention underfunded schools, but most of the state schools at present are underfunded. Quotas which you also rail against are not something I mentioned and are not something which would be used as I too dislike the idea of quotas |
| Date | 13:41:37, August 16, 2005 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Admissions will be 'blind' therefore I see very little possibility for discrimination at that stage. If necessary the applications would not contain any financial details or personal details etc. indeed the applications could be collated by a government agency before being sent to schoools ensuring that they could be completely anonomous with no name or address given to the school but only held by the agency through which applications would be sent and processed. Then once in, the obnly difference woukld be that the government would be paying raher than parents and many schools would have burseries and funds to help poorer students. As the government would be paying I see no reason why inner city schools could not be viable, however if necessary tax incetives etc. could be proided to encourage the establishment of schools in these areas and corporations could use profits from richer areas to subsidise the poorer ones. As a last resort whilst not ideal I concede, charter schools will remain for the moment. You mention the underfunding of schools, but what are the present state shcools if not woefully underfunded and you rail against quotas which I did not mention as I also dislike them and would not consider them. |
| Date | 18:59:51, August 16, 2005 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Sorry, don't know why there are 2 versions of my above comments!!!! |
| Date | 23:01:27, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Vouchers are essentially quotas. State schools need not be underfunded, look at the Soviet system. Private schools will cut corners to gain a profit. |
| Date | 18:27:30, August 17, 2005 CET | From | Rationalist Party | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Canada funds their universities, most are more highly rated than American (private) universities in their fields. (Guelph and U. Calgary are the two top rated vet. schools in the world, Queens is one of the best business schools in N.A., Waterloo ranks with MIT in Maths and Computers...) |
| Date | 18:29:48, August 17, 2005 CET | From | Rationalist Party | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | "As most of you will be aware, we believe that the private sector can guarantee a far higher standard of public services than the state can afford to provide"-The private sector guarantees nothing unless you pay for it "Therefore the state will pay for the education and healthcare of those unable to pay for it themselves."- Will they pay for the most expensive school? If not, it's systemic discrimination |
| Date | 18:51:54, August 17, 2005 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Rationalists: Yes, the government will undertake to pay for the school of choice for that individual. If that means the most expensive shcool then so be it the government WILL pay for it otherwise as you say it would be systematic discrimination |
| Date | 21:16:45, August 17, 2005 CET | From | Rationalist Party | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | Then the private schools whill charge whatever they want because there is no supply and demand relation (you know, that reason prices stay down in a free market) because people will be provided whatever they want. Thus, this idea becomes economically unfeasable. |
| Date | 22:02:56, August 18, 2005 CET | From |  Federation Under Crazy Killers -- United | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | You people who say private schools will not educate are BLIND!! PRIVATE SCHOOLS EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD AND THEY WORK!!!!! |
| Date | 22:03:21, August 18, 2005 CET | From | Federation Under Crazy Killers -- United | To | Debating the Public Services Modernisation Act |
| Message | AND THEY DONT DISCRIMINATE!!!! |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 100 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 155 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Did you know you can change the official name of your nation? All you need to do is draw up a new name that is in accordance with the Nation Renaming Guide, pass a bill proposing the name change with a two-thirds majority and then post a request to Moderation on the "Renaming Requests" thread. You can change city and region names in this way too. |
| Random quote: "I start with the premise that the function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers." - Ralph Nader |