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: Second Reform Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Classical Liberal 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: September 2645
Description[?]:
| An act to reform the economy. (This act contains aspects of the Great Economic Reform Act, just separated from the other proposals). CLAUSES TO PROPOSALS: 1. Subsidy is direct central government subsidy, should local governments decide they wish to subsidise the cost for local routes then they shall be allowed to do so. 2. Private power-stations supply the whole power output for the national grid but, in a national crisis, they must operate under the direction of the Ministry of Infrastructure. 3. No more than 50% of power stations may be owned by foreign companies. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on energy generation.
Old value:: Private and public power stations exist side-by-side.
Current: Private and public power stations exist side-by-side.
Proposed: Private power stations provide energy for the entire power grid.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Funding of public transport (where applicable).
Old value:: Public transport is partially subsidised with the remainder "user-pays".
Current: Public transport is fully subsidised for people with low-income, with the remainder "user-pays".
Proposed: Public transport is fully user-pays.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:26:46, September 26, 2008 CET | From |  Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | We are open to compromise with other parties on the above articles, and welcome their support. |
| Date | 14:42:13, September 26, 2008 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | Oh good, so with this act we force people out onto the streets who can't afford their homes, we increase the price of electricity as producers attempt to maximise profits, we increase the risks to vital services because the national grid isn't maintained to a high enough standard, and we guarantee the closure of many vital but little used transport routes. With one move we're able to smash anyone who isn't quite rich enough to afford a house, or a car and increase their costs exponentially. Wonderful... |
| Date | 18:42:09, September 26, 2008 CET | From | Hobrazian Extraordinary Gentlemen's Club | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | Oj, after WSS described the possible results of the bill, i will probably change my opinion and join CP on the proposals. HA! kidding, still undergoing the treatment in the mental asylum. |
| Date | 23:45:13, September 26, 2008 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | WE think the Government should concentrate on governing, let the private sector increase the quality of the power grid, let the private sector produce enough electricity for the entire country, let the competition push down the price of housing and public transport, let the people be free! |
| Date | 10:31:00, September 27, 2008 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | Yes, let the people be free. Be free to live on the streets when when they can't afford the price of their mortgage or rent. Let the private sector hold, not only every business and private citizen, but this very government to ransom with the cost of power. Lets have routes on public transport that, in some areas hardly move due to the sheer numbers of services whilst in other less profitable but more vital areas nothing moves because there is no service. These are all areas that the government should be involved in because to govern the government must lead and provide a fair basis for all, be they business or private citizen. What this bill does is take away the ability to make things fair for all and instead make the entire nation reliant on big business and, in so doing, make the government open to the influence of big business impairing its ability to govern. |
| Date | 21:49:52, September 28, 2008 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | What do you suggest then? |
| Date | 21:52:26, September 28, 2008 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | Competition would force electricity prices down, housing would be affected by competition too, and house prices would only be forced up by demand, which means that there are a lot of people who can afford to pay the prices demanded. |
| Date | 22:04:44, September 28, 2008 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | Why does Hobrazia need public power stations when other countries can provide power to their citizens without them? When the Hobrazian Government provides electricity at a low price by subsidizing its operations, it is using the tax crown for this, which has already been levied from the taxpayer. If the Hobrazian Government did not forcibly impose that charge (just the portion of tax which is used to subsidize government electricity companies) on private citizens in the first place, people would have more many to spend on private electricity anyway, at a rate a price that the private sector can realistically produce it at. |
| Date | 23:59:26, September 28, 2008 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | Okay, we are willing to enter debate on this and we shall cover each article separately. 1. Whilst we, in general, support the idea of ticket prices covering the cost of operations, in certain areas that is not possible. Some people are unable to purchase cars or other means of personnel transport but overall passenger numbers make these services uneconomic. It is in these situations where a subsidy is required to provide a vital public service for the benefit of the nation rather than a purely profit based motive. 2. The majority of housing in this country is privately owned or privately rented. However, economic conditions effect the cost of housing. In certain areas housing becomes unaffordable to low income earners and it is in these situations where the government must act in order to secure the safety of its citizens. There are already limits in place on the types and numbers of public housing provided ( http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=207632 ) and these limitations are vital to allow for the industry to continue to grow, but we must be sensible as a nation and not let those people who are unable to afford private accommodation become homeless. 3. What does it matter what other countries provide? We are not interested in whether other countries believe is the best, we are only concerned with what is best for this country. Currently the Hobrazian energy generators are not directly affiliated with the government, nor are they heavily subsidised by the government. What they do however is provide a safety net. Should a national emergency or crisis occur it is vital that infrastructure be in the hands of the government and secure, something that cannot be guaranteed by allowing a free for all in the private sector. Moreover, Hobrazia operates an economic system that allows for any foreign competitor to purchase any Hobrazian industry with impunity. Whilst we have no interest in changing that directive, we must secure infrastructure for our citizens above the idea of a market. We would also ask, if the private sector is so efficient, why should they be concerned about a public company operating in the same industry? 4. This is the most important of all the articles being discussed. It is foolish to allow private industry to own *vital* infrastructure. Any private business has one core requirement, to make a profit. We understand and support this, but in regards something as important as the national grid which supplies energy not only to private citizens but also to this government, business and industry, but also to competing energy suppliers. The current legislation (http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=207317) requires that, not only does the national grid have to be maintained to a minimum quality, something that cannot be guaranteed by a private company, but that it also supply that energy to the competing energy providers at the same rate and at, or just above, cost so as to allow those companies to provide best value for money to the consumer. Should a private company be allowed access to and ownership of the national grid then they are capable of effecting that provision to the energy providers and limiting competition within the market which we cannot condone. In regards the points made by the Conservative Party directly: "Competition would force electricity prices down" - Which is why we allow competition in the consumer market, but the price stays lows because the provider end of the market is kept low by the public companies. To allow a free market into that area would increase costs to the consumer as each part of the market, from producer, to the grid and finally to provider would each necessitate that they make a profit which would not allow prices to fall below that currently provided. "house prices would only be forced up by demand, which means that there are a lot of people who can afford to pay the prices demanded." - But there are as many people who are unable to afford those same prices. Take into consideration Hoba Beach in Deltaria. This areas primary income is through recreation and holiday periods. This has meant that a large proportion of local housing has been purchased by second home buyers at high prices. Whilst this is good, it has meant that many in the local area are struggling to afford the prices of these homes as demand has increased. They are supported by the work of the local councils in providing sponsored housing which has allowed for local services to be provided at all times of the year. Should this provision be lost, then areas like Hoba Beach could become "ghost towns" as the locals are no longer able to afford the cost of housing in their local areas. "If the Hobrazian Government did not forcibly impose that charge (just the portion of tax which is used to subsidize government electricity companies) on private citizens in the first place, people would have more many to spend on private electricity anyway, at a rate a price that the private sector can realistically produce it at." - The cost per person in tax is lower than the cost per person that the private companies charge. Moreover, taxation on income does not start until the individual earns over 20,000HCR, however all people would be effected by an increase in electricity prices which would hit those on low incomes doubly hard. |
| Date | 22:13:45, September 29, 2008 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | We take your points on Article 1 and Article 2 (we were not aware of the bill), but we disagree (but still take your points) on Article 3 and 4. - Question: How much do we subsidize the state-owned electricity company/ies? ""house prices would only be forced up by demand, which means that there are a lot of people who can afford to pay the prices demanded." - But there are as many people who are unable to afford those same prices. Take into consideration Hoba Beach in Deltaria. This areas primary income is through recreation and holiday periods. This has meant that a large proportion of local housing has been purchased by second home buyers at high prices. Whilst this is good, it has meant that many in the local area are struggling to afford the prices of these homes as demand has increased. They are supported by the work of the local councils in providing sponsored housing which has allowed for local services to be provided at all times of the year. Should this provision be lost, then areas like Hoba Beach could become "ghost towns" as the locals are no longer able to afford the cost of housing in their local areas." - This is unfortunate, but a reality in a consumer market. Some locals in such areas many have to move to other nearby towns where housing prices are lower. On the other hand, we could provide them with state housing, but then they may lose the incentive to work to keep up with second home buyers. Nevertheless, we may consider dropping this proposal. WE will put this to vote soon, after you have made any more comments you feel are necessary. |
| Date | 09:13:55, September 30, 2008 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | We propose a compromise. We will support articles 1 and 3, but request that three points be added to the bill descriptor. 1. Subsidy is direct central government subsidy, should local governments decide they wish to subsidise the cost for local routes then they shall be allowed to do so. 2. Private power-stations supply the whole power output for the national grid but, in a national crisis, they must operate under the direction of the Ministry of Infrastructure. 3. No more than 50% of power stations may be owned by foreign companies. This allows for the retention of the vital infrastructure, and maintains fair competition in the service side of the industry. It allows maintains that those on low incomes are able to have a home and we don't get the "ghost town" effect that would otherwise happen. |
| Date | 21:56:05, September 30, 2008 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | Very well. We agree. |
| Date | 21:57:24, September 30, 2008 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | We will remove Articles 2 and 4 from the bill, and add the requested clauses, but will repropose Article 2 and 4 in the Third Reform Act. |
| Date | 22:07:30, September 30, 2008 CET | From | Classical Liberal Party | To | Debating the Second Reform Act |
| Message | Make that a third reform act. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 243 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 61 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 96 |
| Random fact: Character names must appear plausible and should consist of at least a first name and a surname. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented |
| Random quote: "I'll see you in the Palace in Kivonia once we win this war... and I'm ecstatic to be the one to execute you. Sleep well." - Queen Annalise, former Telamonese monarch |