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: Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal Imperialist Party
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: May 2113
Description[?]:
| In order to repair some of the damage done to the previously staunchly free-market economy, we propose the following bill. We are willing to listen to compromise proposals. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Charter school policy (free, privately run, publicly funded schools).
Old value:: Only non-profit organizations may establish charter schools.
Current: Only non-profit organizations may establish charter schools.
Proposed: Charter schools are not allowed.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of exotic animals.
Old value:: Only zoos or zoological institutions are allowed to keep exotic animals.
Current: Only zoos or zoological institutions are allowed to keep exotic animals.
Proposed: Everyone may keep exotic animals, the trade in exotic animals is unregulated.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: The government subsidises the operations of low-income farming families.
Current: Agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state are subsidized.
Proposed: The government denies subsidy assistance to farmers.
Article 4
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 5
Proposal[?] to change The regulation of higher education.
Old value:: The government allows public and private higher education institutions to coexist with self-regulation for those that are private.
Current: The government allows private higher education but regulates it to meet nationally set standards.
Proposed: The government does not fund any public higher education institutions, permitting only private higher education institutions to exist.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards space exploration.
Old value:: The government shall operate a space agency that contracts with and oversees private space-exploration companies.
Current: The government shall operate a space agency that contracts with and oversees private space-exploration companies.
Proposed: The government shall issue permits to private space-exploration companies.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:55:27, September 17, 2005 CET | From |  Freedom Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | Hang on. You opposed my attempt to deregulate gambling. Why? |
| Date | 22:47:24, September 17, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Imperialist Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | :blink: How did that get in there? I'll delete it. Sorry about that. |
| Date | 22:49:42, September 17, 2005 CET | From | Civic Democratic Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | I completely support his and will vote with our allies in the LIP on this bill. I would seriously doubt the ability of our current coalition to stay together if we cannot agree on certain core elements, namely economic policy. We call upon the Conservatives to join with their other three coalition partners in voting in favour of this bill. |
| Date | 22:50:45, September 17, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Imperialist Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | If Veritaserum vote in favour of this, it can go through without conservative support. We would, of course, prefere conservative support for this, however. |
| Date | 23:58:16, September 17, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | Strongly opposed to all articles, this will plunge our nation into a deep crisis! |
| Date | 00:34:54, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Imperialist Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | This is how our nation was for about 30 years until very recently, and I didnt see a "deep crisis". |
| Date | 13:35:22, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | The Right Honourable Tom Laird says "Dont worry. Economics and the RSDP dont go together" |
| Date | 17:10:52, September 18, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, if the "Right Honourable" Tom Laird is going to continue to insult a large portion of the Rutanian population, I request that he be removed from the Federal Parliament. |
| Date | 18:33:43, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Imperialist Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | Mr Speaker, could you remind the RSDP person over there that you cant remove people entirely from the Federal Parliament, and also that the RSDP is not a large portion of the population. Only about 117 people, in fact. |
| Date | 18:46:07, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | OOC: It's Madam Federal Chancellor. I thought we decided this :p Head of government acts as the leader of parliament, head of state acts as the executive branch. Drop one (no charter schools? Why?), two and three and we'll vote for. Until then, we're voting against. IC: Mrs. Dixon rolls her eyes. "That's quite enough gentlemen, no one is being removed from this body" |
| Date | 20:49:00, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Imperialist Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | OOC: The Head of Government =/= the Speaker. I dont want charter schools becuase they're funded by the state, which I dont like. In short they're pointless. Two - I'd probably be willing to drop that one. It seems fairly irrelevant. Three - That's more difficult. Farming subsidies are not a good thing. They just prop up unprofitable business. |
| Date | 20:59:59, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | OOC: This is why we need a constitutional convention, to lay out the organization of government. I've seen it as a clear executive branch, in the hands of the HoS, and a legislative branch with a speaker elected by the parliament (the head of government) We're in favor of charter schools (besides for personal reasons) because they provide a happy medium- efficiently run government schools, and farming subsidies because we're blatantly being political and playing towards our base. |
| Date | 21:23:39, September 18, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | "Mr Speaker, could you remind the RSDP person over there that you cant remove people entirely from the Federal Parliament, and also that the RSDP is not a large portion of the population. Only about 117 people, in fact." 1. That only goes for members, not necessarily for ministers. 2. There is a thing we have in Rutania, it's called "democracy". It's a system in which a party gets voters and in which parties represent parts of the population. Perhaps you've heard of it. ;-) |
| Date | 21:24:23, September 18, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | Also, the RSDP has more than 200,000 registered members at the moment. |
| Date | 21:43:10, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Imperialist Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | "OOC: This is why we need a constitutional convention, to lay out the organization of government. I've seen it as a clear executive branch, in the hands of the HoS, and a legislative branch with a speaker elected by the parliament (the head of government) We're in favor of charter schools (besides for personal reasons) because they provide a happy medium- efficiently run government schools, and farming subsidies because we're blatantly being political and playing towards our base." OOC: You dont need a constitution, you jsut need to pass a normal bill sayign X person is the speaker. Much simpler, and it doesnt fix the whole government system to one single point in time which happened to make the constitution. Anyway, I am assuming that we are following the normal Parliamentary system (as that is how it's always been RPed in past) and in that system the speaker is an MP who has no government position and was not directly elected, and usually cannot vote (well, technically can but always abstains). "1. That only goes for members, not necessarily for ministers." The speaker cant remove ministers, that requires an act of parliament. "2. There is a thing we have in Rutania, it's called "democracy". It's a system in which a party gets voters and in which parties represent parts of the population. Perhaps you've heard of it. ;-)" Oh yes, because OF COURSE all voters read, understand and agree with ALL of a party's manifesto. |
| Date | 21:49:48, September 18, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | "The speaker cant remove ministers, that requires an act of parliament." Not from office, from the floor. ;-) "Oh yes, because OF COURSE all voters read, understand and agree with ALL of a party's manifesto." If you are being sarcastic, I must say I'm shocked at the lack of faith you show towards democracy. |
| Date | 22:33:40, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | OOC: What's the point in that? Are you seriously suggesting it would be easier to make a bill making someone a speaker every time we have an election rather then just hand the power over to the HoG or the largest party? Traditionally, the speaker goes to the most senior members (which is something pointless in this game) or to the leadership of the majority party, or to an elected official (eg, in the US, the Vice President). I don't see what you've got against a constitution, which is something we sorely need to deal with these issues. SDP, if you think you can get it to pass, try a motion of censure. |
| Date | 23:13:33, September 18, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Imperialist Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | OOC: A constitution locks the nation in a specific state of mind by giving that one document a sense of absolute authority over everything else, which is jsut needless. Make a bill that says who is speaker, what the speaker can do etc... but there is no NEED for it to be some silly revered constitution. Britain manages perfectly fine without one, and we have important issues decided by Parliament and the will of the people of the present day, not decided by unelected judges trying to interpret vague statements made 300 years ago. |
| Date | 16:51:00, September 19, 2005 CET | From | Civic Democratic Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | OOC: Alright Lakhim in most countries the Speaker is a non-partisan person selected by the parliament itself and is neither elected nor part of a party. This is commonly found in most parliamentary systems and all Westminster style parliaments. What I still think we should do is just make a rule stating that one person, with such a position rotated, should act as Speaker. Having the head of government act in that way allows him to control the parliament in a way such that opposition voices could be silenced. |
| Date | 17:29:37, September 19, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | "SDP, if you think you can get it to pass, try a motion of censure." I doubt it'd get passed. ;-) |
| Date | 20:53:41, September 19, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Imperialist Party | To | Debating the Economic Liberalisation Act, 2112 |
| Message | OOC: Agreed, CDP. In Britain, the speaker isnt allowed to do anything but abstain, and his seat isnt considered part of the government's majority. It prevents abuse. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 310 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 252 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 37 |
| Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, special care must be taken to ensure realism is maintained when role-playing a government controlled by an ethnic and/or religious minority. If it is to be supposed that this government is supported by a majority of the population, then this should be plausibly and sufficiently role-played. The burden of proof is on the player or players role-playing such a regime to demonstrate that it is being done realistically |
| Random quote: "A wise ruler ought never to keep faith when by doing so it would be against his interests." - Niccolo Machiavelli |