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: Anti-Dictator Cabinet Proposal of March 2119
Details
Submitted by[?]: Union of Progressive Ulama
Status[?]: defeated
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: November 2119
Description[?]:
| Proposing a Cabinet |
Proposals
Article 1
The responsibilites of Head of Government will be conducted by the Anarcho-Punks
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the Anarcho-Punks
Article 3
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Revolutionary Socialist Council
Article 4
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the Anarcho-Punks
Article 5
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the Anarcho-Punks
Article 6
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the Anarcho-Punks
Article 7
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Revolutionary Socialist Council
Article 8
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the Revolutionary Socialist Council
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 Aliojin Party SC
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:41:26, October 01, 2005 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Council | To | Debating the Anti-Dictator Cabinet Proposal of March 2119 |
| Message | We would be happy to support this. |
| Date | 17:41:52, October 01, 2005 CET | From | Union of Progressive Ulama | To | Debating the Anti-Dictator Cabinet Proposal of March 2119 |
| Message | A cabinet along these lines, grouping the Conservatives with the other parties which do not support a police state, seems the only viable possibility for peace and progress. |
| Date | 17:46:12, October 01, 2005 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Council | To | Debating the Anti-Dictator Cabinet Proposal of March 2119 |
| Message | Well we have reached a turning point in negotiations with the BASP and the NUP. We feel little in common with the Conservatives and were disgusted by their handling of the disturbances between the two parties. |
| Date | 18:08:32, October 01, 2005 CET | From | Union of Progressive Ulama | To | Debating the Anti-Dictator Cabinet Proposal of March 2119 |
| Message | What a shocking and sudden U-turn. What a betrayal of working people. We send this to certain defeat in order to keep the historical record clear: the MLS has, in a matter of minutes, changed from a principled party into a gang of apologists for aspiring dictators and pro-slavery advocates. |
| Date | 19:19:07, October 01, 2005 CET | From | Anarcho-Punks | To | Debating the Anti-Dictator Cabinet Proposal of March 2119 |
| Message | Of course we have little in common with the MLS, and every other party here. Our only true ally was the now-defunct PLC. Without them, there are only big-government parties, right or left. The MLS apparently has no idea what either Marx or Lenin stood for, given their newfound alliance with the fascists. This confusion and disarray is why we need new elections to bring the more moderate UPU back into the mix, because the most effective cabinet would involve them. |
| Date | 00:36:47, October 02, 2005 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Council | To | Debating the Anti-Dictator Cabinet Proposal of March 2119 |
| Message | We wish to make two points. Firstly, we said that if the ACP cabinet passed we would withdraw our name from the anti-dictatorship pledge, meaning that if the ACP can choose to work with these parties then so can we. In addition, the ACP would happily have included the NUP in their cabinet and gone on ruling the country were it not for the NUP rejecting your cabinet proposal! You seem to change your policy on parties to suit your own needs. May we add, despite having no firm evidence, we suspect very much the ACP of having a direct influence on the NUP throughout the troubles between them and the BASP. The ACP seemed to be punishing only one side of the violence, leaving the NUP to attack with impunity. Either purposefully or accidentaly, the ACP mismanaged the crisis in a dispicable way. That is why we are uneasy with working with them. We have, however, decided to vote for none of these cabinets for the time being and allow further negotiation. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 282 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 408 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 60 |
| Random fact: There is a phpBB forum dedicated to Particracy. Please click the Forum link in the top game menu. Additions to the game, suggestions and discussion is held there so get involved. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "Modern technology owes ecology an apology." - Alan M. Eddison |