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: New Policies Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Partai Komunis Hobrazia
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: April 2483
Description[?]:
| This is a bill to encourage tree replantating by logging companies because it is more economical than waiting for forests to regrow on their own. It could take many years for a forest to self-regrow, however, replanting by logging companies could accelerate forest regrowth by an incredible amount, and allow logging companies to cut down more trees and yet do less harm to the environment. The police and military will be seperated further, as soldiers are not trained for police action. As there is little gun ownership in the country, the military should not be required unless extreme situations arise. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on tree plantation.
Old value:: The government does not intervene with regard to the replantation of trees.
Current: The government requires tree plantation at higher than replacement levels for all logging or clearance operations.
Proposed: The government encourages, but does not require new and replacement plantation.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:22:28, November 06, 2007 CET | From | Partai Komunis Hobrazia | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | This will make country better! |
| Date | 14:30:15, November 06, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | We support article 1 however we would prefer more distinct reasoning behind article 2 (although we do not discount possible support). |
| Date | 15:08:37, November 06, 2007 CET | From | Hobrazian Peoples Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | Can't accept ony of these articles. |
| Date | 15:56:35, November 06, 2007 CET | From | Partai Komunis Hobrazia | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | Please discuss why none of these articles are acceptable. Our reasoning behind Article 2 is that if logging companies replant forests that have been cut down, the forest regrowth will commence faster and logging companies will therefore be able to cut down the same forest again. This means that logging companies will be able to either operate in a smaller area and still make the same profit, or operate in a larger area and make even more profit,. The forest regrowth will ensure that Hobrazia has many forests, and healthy forests can be excellent tourist attractions, especially during the fall. Healthy forests also protect rivers from runoff, meaning that any runoff containing pollutants will be less likely to reach the rivers, and thus, it will be cheaper to clean river water for use by people. Thus, forest regrowth is both economically advantageous and ecologically friendly. |
| Date | 05:10:39, November 08, 2007 CET | From | Hobrazian Federalist Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | The Partai Komunis Hobrazia, having cut the bill to a single article, still fights federalism and thus must be opposed. |
| Date | 08:59:36, November 08, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | Federalism is a flawed, expensive and inefficient system which should be fought. |
| Date | 09:28:40, November 08, 2007 CET | From | Hobrazian Federalist Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | Federalism is not flawed. The ruling state with absolute power is. Inefficient? Killing anyone who disagrees with you sure is efficient, but we clearly do not do that. The tyrannical viewpoints of your party are showing. |
| Date | 13:08:41, November 08, 2007 CET | From | Hobrazian Peoples Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | How can supporting unitarism and centralisation in anyway be tyrannical? We could argue that federalism would end up in just as tyrannical situations. Also killing is not a matter of government control. It is more a matter of unequal standards. |
| Date | 14:29:27, November 08, 2007 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | "Federalism is not flawed." - In what way is there no flaw in a system that requires repetition of all systems of governance in each area. "Inefficient?" - Indeed (see above point). "Killing anyone who disagrees with you sure is efficient, but we clearly do not do that." - You are correct, it would be efficient but, as you say, we clearly do not do that, so where is your argument? "The tyrannical viewpoints of your party are showing." - Please point out any "tyrannical viewpoints" and we would be interested in discussing those views, however as these views do not exist we believe it may take some time before we hear from you. |
| Date | 18:56:28, November 08, 2007 CET | From | Hobrazian Federalist Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | First, the Anti-Gaulist Movement shall address the HPP. Centralization, especially concerning the Second Imperial Republic, is clearly tyrannical. When you give the government unlimited power, the government can, and most likely will abuse it. With true federalism, the people may break off at any moment and fight against the tyranny that is the centralized state. Federalism puts the people in control, and not the bureaucrats. And now we shall address the "We Say So!" Party. We ask how you consider the repetition of the systems of governance in each area to be a flaw. Secondly, onto the point of killing people we must look at the abilities of the state. When one talks about centralization and efficiency, one can easily claim many things are more efficient. However, we should not base our laws and government solely on this, for it can easily cause abuses. It is repetitive for a reason, you see. As to the tyrannical viewpoint your party holds; it believes in the continuation of the Second Imperial Republic, and is for terror. Ergo we shall oppose you and all other parties with the same aims. |
| Date | 21:45:34, November 08, 2007 CET | From | Partai Komunis Hobrazia | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | The bill does not, in fact, infringe upon any rights as the Anti-Gaulist Alliance may claim. As intended, the bill merely instates a program to encourage companies to replant forests. Tyrannical? No. A service to the people? Yes. The program merely steers corporations towards how they can benefit both themselves and the public populace at the same time. If the corporations don't wish to abide by the act, that is their unfortunate and unpenalized choice. If forests are cut down and not replanted, wood costs could raise. Contaminated runoff not caught by forests could enter rivers, and excess nitrates in runoff cause by forest destruction would cause algal blooms and adversely affect fishing in lakes and ponds and off the coast when the nitrates reach the ocean. This bill was carefully thought out to ensure benefit for all--who is harmed by the bill? Who does not see benefit in our nation? |
| Date | 22:16:40, November 08, 2007 CET | From | Hobrazian Federalist Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | The Partai Komunis Hobrazia, knowing full well that they are seeking to reverse the policy put forward by our party, are attempting to utilize their ability to divert attention away from real issues. First, the corporation should not have a say over who manages the forests. The people should. Secondly, the original policy put forth by our party encourages the re-plating of forests far more than your suggestions do as it compels the local government, controlled by the people to re-plant the forest rather than rely on the corporation to do so. |
| Date | 00:54:08, November 09, 2007 CET | From | Partai Komunis Hobrazia | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | No, your legislation merely gives the local governments the power, and does not encourage them, whereas corporations already have the power and need encouragement. And the corporations should have a say over who manages the forests. They pay for the right to cut down the forests, no? They pay the government, and the government works for the people. The people have the right to re-plant forests already. They can go out and plant trees--or better yet, they can work for corporations and get paid to do it. The people elect the government so that the government can work for them, they do not elect the government so that the people can work for the government. It is our supreme goal to ensure that each and every citizen of Hobrazia is successful and leads an easy life. Local governments, additionally, do not collect the neccessary funding to engage in forest replantation programs, nor do they have the need to. Forests are forests, and towns are towns. The forests undergo little notice by local governments, becase forestation is a --national-- problem, not a local one. Thus, it must be dealt with on a national scale. It is easier to deal with forestation on a national scale than a local scale because forests are quite huge. To expect towns to engage in forest replantation is ludicrous--towns enough are mired by scandalous officials, budget crises and incredible mismanagement. Have you ever lived in a town? Do you realize that huge amounts of money are wasted because towns do not negotiate building contracts correctly, or massive grants are wasted because of embezzlement? It's a ridiculous idea to put even more of a burden on the local government. Corporations, however, will have a drive and a will to replant forests. Why? As stated previously, it benefits them. A single town does not have enough land to replant enough trees to benefit itself because forests are far too large. A corporation can act over a larger area. AND! This bill was proposed before your policy had been put into effect. It was not intended to reverse your policy, it was intended quite as an alternative. |
| Date | 01:53:12, November 09, 2007 CET | From | Hobrazian Federalist Party | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | The idea that the government works for the people is foolish. The people should decide what forests they can replant or not. They know the situation, and will handle it accordingly. Secondly, the issue of negotiating building contracts will be decided by the people, not corporate control nor the government. |
| Date | 20:38:09, November 09, 2007 CET | From | Partai Komunis Hobrazia | To | Debating the New Policies Act |
| Message | If the government does not work the people, the government should be abolished. However, the government does exist, and so, should work for the people. The people do not know what forests to replant because not all areas need forest replantation. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 151 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 26 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 223 |
| Random fact: The players in a nation have a collective responsibility to prevent confusion by ensuring unofficial or outdated bills labelled as "Cultural Protocols" are removed from their nation page. |
| Random quote: "If Lincoln were alive today, he’d be turning over in his grave." - Gerald Ford |