Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: July 5472
Next month in: 03:53:48
Server time: 16:06:11, April 20, 2024 CET
Currently online (1): Liu Che | 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: Intelligence Services Provision Act

Details

Submitted by[?]: United Liberal Alliance

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: December 2098

Description[?]:

We believe that Telamon must be able to defend itself and to obtain important information on our enemies as well as preventing them from obtaining information on us. As such we propose the creation of the Commonwealth Intelligence & Defence Agency (CIDA) to co-ordinate such intelligence and defence operations.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date20:19:27, August 18, 2005 CET
FromPartiya Nacionalnogo Progressa
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageOf course we need this.

Date20:20:45, August 18, 2005 CET
FromPartiya Nacionalnogo Progressa
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageWe should know what dark affairs are created in Hutori.

Date20:25:17, August 18, 2005 CET
FromRationalist Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageWhy should we interfere in the affairs of other nations, this is an overextension of our influence.

Date22:33:01, August 18, 2005 CET
From Federation Under Crazy Killers -- United
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageIt is not interfering, it is watching.

Date22:49:45, August 18, 2005 CET
FromRationalist Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageAll types of covert action? Spies are a necessary evil. We do not need a CIA style intelligence agency though.

Date22:53:19, August 18, 2005 CET
FromUnited Liberal Alliance
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageWe are simply giving ourselves the option of defending our country through covert means. We do not anticipate assassinations etc. to be part of the angecies activities and simply we expect most activities to be counter-espionage related. It is simply the case that like nuclear and CB weapons we retain the right for defensive purposes

Date22:59:06, August 18, 2005 CET
FromRationalist Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageIt hurts our image on the international stage, it looks like we are going to do these things (look at Mossad in the 70's and 80's and hte CIA throughout the cold war). If you can supply a reason that we may need these abilities then I might consider it.

Date23:05:09, August 18, 2005 CET
FromProgressive Marxist Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageThere are no regions hostile to us. I refuse to support this bill. First other nation's citizens, next our own.

Date00:12:57, August 19, 2005 CET
FromConservative Party of Telamon
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageWe agree to this.

Date13:12:52, August 19, 2005 CET
FromUnited Liberal Alliance
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageRationalists & PMP: We need the option to be there in case it is necessary and to provide adequate defence - you surely cannot belive that other states will not spy on us. It is in exactly the same mode as our other defence laws in which we have reserved the right to develop NBC weapons but undertake not to use them first (& hopefully not at all). If people would rather that we have the middle option which is simply provide sureveillance, then I could agree to that - in fact that was the option that I originally considered but I did then feel that it unnecessarily constrained us. This bill will not harm our international image any more than us continuing to have NBC weapons has amongst those who have banned them. The fact that we do have NBC weapons has not so far adversly affected our foreign policy and I do not believe that this bill iwl either (otherwise I would not have proposed it)

Date15:17:58, August 19, 2005 CET
FromRationalist Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageWe would agree to surveillance, but not covert attacks and other actions against our neighbours

Date17:53:53, August 19, 2005 CET
FromUnited Liberal Alliance
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageThe reason we proposed this option was not so that we could engage in covert attacks on others, but because we felt that the other option may not give us enough power to properly defend against and prevent covert attacks on us by others.

Date20:58:28, August 19, 2005 CET
FromProgressive Marxist Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageI am still against this as any external spy agency eventuallty turns towards its own people.

Date21:15:36, August 19, 2005 CET
FromUnited Liberal Alliance
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessagePMP: We undestand (to an extent) your problems with the bill, but if we have no itelligence agency then we will be really disadvantaged in trying to defend Telamon against those countries which may be aggressive towards us. It is a preventative and defensive measure only and would be under strict government and Parliamentary oversight

Date22:03:41, August 19, 2005 CET
From Federation Under Crazy Killers -- United
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageAnd we need them to overthrow the dictators....mwahahahaha........j/k.....

Date22:34:37, August 19, 2005 CET
FromRationalist Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
Message"The nation has an intelligence agency that is permitted by law to undertake all types of covert operations in other countries"- There is nothing defensive about this. It is purely a tool to destabilise our neighbours.

Date10:57:08, August 20, 2005 CET
FromTelemon Lutheran Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageWe need something like this regardless of risks, we need to be able to protect our people and our nation, and i dont have any problems with this proposal.

Date11:05:20, August 20, 2005 CET
FromTelemon Lutheran Party
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
Messagerisks i mean that spies will eventualy revert to spying on Telemonians

Date12:09:01, August 20, 2005 CET
FromUnited Liberal Alliance
ToDebating the Intelligence Services Provision Act
MessageThe problem is that our neigbours are also proposing this option - as are most states around the world.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
     

Total Seats: 190

no
  

Total Seats: 41

abstain
  

Total Seats: 24


Random fact: Cabinet ministers who disagree seriously with the head of government would usually be expected to resign. Parties within the cabinet may attempt to manoeuvre to replace the head of government though, for example by proposing a new cabinet bill or voting for an early election.

Random quote: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 90