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: Energy Provision Law
Details
Submitted by[?]: Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy
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 2120
Description[?]:
| We believe the local authorities have to decide on this. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Energy regulation.
Old value:: Energy is provided by private companies which are not subject to any special regulations.
Current: Energy is provided by private companies but the prices they can charge are regulated.
Proposed: Energy provision is left to local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:20:41, October 01, 2005 CET | From |  Capitalist Party | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | Why? Why should local governments be responsible for providing energy? Leave it to efficient, competitive private companies |
| Date | 20:11:40, October 01, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | That can still happen if the local population think that is best. Why does the CP fear the opinion of the local residents ? |
| Date | 20:47:38, October 01, 2005 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | Because most of the local residents are not qualified to judge the impact of the selection of energy sources, nor are they qualified to judge the stifling effect of regulation. Because local residents like to interfere in the legitimate activities of those around them, without justification. Personally, it's not the local residents we are concerned about, we think they are welcome to campaign or picket or pursue any legal protest they like. We are concerned with local governments because they have actual power. |
| Date | 00:45:11, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | To us It's a democratic way of decision making. They are responsable for the concequences of course. |
| Date | 00:50:12, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | You mean it's a way of a local mob imposing their will on a minority? |
| Date | 01:00:16, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | Well that's democracy isn't it. The local government is also democraticly controlled and if doing wrong there are new elections. The same way as in our capital. We really see no difference. Why all that mistrust ? |
| Date | 02:01:49, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | The difference is that at the moment, government has no involvement. No involvement - no problem. This introduces the government and hence introduces problematic intervention. Look around you at the big governments of today, and ask yourself whether *you* trust them. OOC: Bush, Blair, and those are just the governments in free countries, how about the governments in China, N. Korea, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia. Hmmm, why mistrust government? |
| Date | 02:08:57, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | Of course I mean governments of democraticly controlled nations like the US and Britain and in no way China etc. |
| Date | 02:58:32, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | I'm sure that you do, but my point was that government does not equal competent, government does not equal 'good' (in a moral sense) and government does not deserve to be trusted. I'm not saying that a government is any worse than any other entity (e.g., a corporation) but government is a guaranteed monopoly and hence the absolute best case scenario is that the government is competent. This is seldom the case. Outside of government you have competition, so even if 90% of the corporations are incompetent/evil, you still have the other 10%. Moreover, governments even in democratically controlled nations do not necessarily reflect the will of even a majority of the electorate (what percentage of the UK public supported the Iraq war, government deceit notwithstanding?). Even when the government DOES reflect the will of the majority, it just means that the majority have the power to dictate their will to the rest. This is one of those areas where governments *keep* making messing it up, and there's really no reason why the government needs to be involved. |
| Date | 14:32:11, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | " I'm sure that you do, but my point was that government does not equal competent, government does not equal 'good' (in a moral sense) and government does not deserve to be trusted. I'm not saying that a government is any worse than any other entity (e.g., a corporation) but government is a guaranteed monopoly and hence the absolute best case scenario is that the government is competent. This is seldom the case. Outside of government you have competition, so even if 90% of the corporations are incompetent/evil, you still have the other 10%." It is all about responsibilities and sure governments make mistakes like every other entity as you mentioned before, but it's up to the locals what they prefer: to contract out certain services, to have these carried out by the services of the districts or something in between. We say let the people decide. Of course a policy change can be dealt with in the districts council or even by holding a referendum initiated by the citizen's themselves. All this doesn't imply it's less effective the opposite is more true because of the democratic control. Sure it will be the will of the majority of the people but that's democracy. "Moreover, governments even in democratically controlled nations do not necessarily reflect the will of even a majority of the electorate (what percentage of the UK public supported the Iraq war, government deceit notwithstanding?)." Well if that's the system, apparently people favour or just accept that. It is democraticly determined. People can change it in Parliament, can't they. "Even when the government DOES reflect the will of the majority, it just means that the majority have the power to dictate their will to the rest. This is one of those areas where governments *keep* making messing it up, and there's really no reason why the government needs to be involved. Moreover, governments even in democratically controlled nations do not necessarily reflect the will of even a majority of the electorate (what percentage of the UK public supported the Iraq war, government deceit notwithstanding?)." One can hold a referendum on certain issues. They can be initiated by the district council or the people. So, may be your problems with proposals like this are solved when people attempt to influence local policy making, leaving the election outside, more often. We, as members of Parliament, can stimulate the practise of direct democracy of course. |
| Date | 19:09:11, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | The problem is that unbridled democracy is simply a legalised might-makes-right form of mob rule. The old sheep and two wolves voting on what's for dinner illustration occurs. How about two creationists and an atheist voting on how to run a school? I cannot accept that creating lots of little government monopolies is the sensible way to pursue energy policy. Nor can I accept that the possibility of elections and referenda is adequate protection against the oppression and ineptitude of the state. |
| Date | 22:30:06, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the Energy Provision Law |
| Message | Although we happens to disagree, thanks for your input. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 231 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 324 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If there are no parties in your nation with seats, feel free to visit the forum and request an early election on the Early Election Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4362 |
| Random quote: "You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight." - Barry Goldwater |