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: Cabinet Proposal of January 2110
Details
Submitted by[?]: Union of Progressive Ulama
Status[?]: passed
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: January 2111
Description[?]:
| Proposing a Cabinet |
Proposals
Article 1
The responsibilites of Head of Government will be conducted by the Union of Progressive Ulama
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the Progressive Liberal Coalition
Article 3
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Union of Progressive Ulama
Article 4
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the Revolutionary Socialist Council
Article 5
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the Progressive Liberal Coalition
Article 6
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the Al'Badaran Bolshevik Movement (SC)
Article 7
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Union of Progressive Ulama
Article 8
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the Progressive Liberal Coalition
Article 9
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the Revolutionary Socialist Council
Article 10
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the Revolutionary Socialist Council
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:48:23, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Union of Progressive Ulama | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 |
| Message | A centre-left cabient giving the three largest parties 3 seats each, and a consolation prize for the Bolsheviks. |
| Date | 03:57:20, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Anarcho-Punks | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 |
| Message | And I get nothing as the fourth biggest, but the Bolsheviks with no seats get something? This proposal is outrageously unfair to the liberty party. |
| Date | 04:06:27, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Union of Progressive Ulama | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 |
| Message | Since it's a left-leaning cabinet, we can hardly include the most right-wing party, as much as we respect the Liberty Party and expect it to grow in future elections. We have proposed a group of ideologically compatible parties in favour of social programmes. We do not believe the Liberty Party woudl wish to be associated with an agenda of expanding government services. (plus, i feel bad for the Bolsheviks getting messed up by the election algorithm, so did what the Sultan's Loyalists did last time and picked a zero-seat party that is compatible on many issues.) |
| Date | 17:38:56, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Aliojin Party SC | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 |
| Message | I am not in... so I am opposed |
| Date | 18:14:59, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Council | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 |
| Message | I would have prefered a cabinet based on the Socialist Coalition...isnt that the major point of forming a coalition? Also I would like the Foreign Affairs Ministry. So I will have to vote no on this cabinet. |
| Date | 00:21:50, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Union of Progressive Ulama | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 |
| Message | When this was presented, the Socialist Coaltion consisted of three parties, all of which were included in the proposal. However, those three were not enough for a majority, so we invited the Sultan's Loyalists to join as well. We do believe it would be best to pass this cabinet for now, and another cabinet can be negotiated in the near future better able to meet all parties' requests. |
| Date | 13:03:31, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Council | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 |
| Message | We will agree on the provision that the cabinet may be re-examined at a later date. |
| Date | 20:58:27, September 14, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist of Al'Badara SC | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 |
| Message | Date 00:21:50, September 14, 2005 CET From Union of Progressive Ulama (SC) To Debating the Cabinet Proposal of January 2110 Message When this was presented, the Socialist Coaltion consisted of three parties, all of which were included in the proposal. However, those three were not enough for a majority, so we invited the Sultan's Loyalists to join as well. We do believe it would be best to pass this cabinet for now, and another cabinet can be negotiated in the near future better able to meet all parties' requests. Not all of which. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 531 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 219 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Real-life religions should not be referenced in Particracy. Terra has its own religions, many of which mirror real-life ones. See: http://particracy.wikia.com/wiki/Illustrated_Catalogue_of_Religion |
| Random quote: "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson |