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: BIG change
Details
Submitted by[?]: Neo Kanist Rite Party of Sorbanika
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2703
Description[?]:
big change |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Structure of the executive branch.
Old value:: The Head of State is hereditary and symbolic; the Head of Government chairs the cabinet.
Current: The Head of State is also Head of Government.
Proposed: The Head of State is also Head of Government.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The formal title of the Head of State.
Old value:: President
Current: President of the Republic
Proposed: Emissary
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 21:21:40, January 22, 2009 CET | From | Neo Kanist Rite Party of Sorbanika | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | We like controversial bills, and this must surely be up there at the top of the list. Any ideas on this? Although i can already anticipate what some parties will say about this. |
Date | 21:36:49, January 22, 2009 CET | From | Christian Democrat Party | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | The CDP agrees with the proposal and believes it makes sense for the Head of State to also be the Head of Government, unless to keep the tradition of a monarchy etc. Will this proposal make the current Head of State, Head of Government or vice versa? |
Date | 22:21:22, January 22, 2009 CET | From | United Workers | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | We agree with this, as if we are to develope as a country, we need to ensure that all leaders are entirely voted in, as this will allow the people to have the control over their country to the maximum. Though our vote doesn't, as yet count for anything, it will be in favour of the 'big change'. |
Date | 22:44:43, January 22, 2009 CET | From | The Likatonian Imperium party | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | same here but will that this make us lose our monarchy because i would then show concern. |
Date | 23:17:46, January 22, 2009 CET | From | Liberal Conservatists | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | This bill is not desirable in our eyes. The monarchy is something we should be proud of and not throw it away. We do not agree. |
Date | 19:40:29, January 23, 2009 CET | From | The Likatonian Imperium party | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | Apon realising that this will see the end of our monarchy (one of which is constitutinal) i have to disagree with this bill. I see this as an attack on our culture and cannot support. This is also against the constitution of our nation. |
Date | 20:14:15, January 23, 2009 CET | From | Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | We don't have a monarchy...Merely a hereditary president :-) |
Date | 13:21:06, January 25, 2009 CET | From | The Likatonian Imperium party | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | oh. Well we should change the name as a hereditary president just sounds weird. any way it also goes against my party doctrine |
Date | 14:24:12, January 26, 2009 CET | From | Neo Kanist Rite Party of Sorbanika | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | We presumed that the LCW would be thoroughly against this, are you? |
Date | 20:11:29, January 26, 2009 CET | From | Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | We would support, reluctantly. We could be persuaded to support enthusiatically if there was a return to the traditional title of Emissary. |
Date | 20:33:38, January 26, 2009 CET | From | Neo Kanist Rite Party of Sorbanika | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | If this bill were to be passed we would of course give the position of head of government/ head of state to the largest party. However we shall wait to hear from the Free Thinking Party first before we consider putting this bill or a similar to it to vote. |
Date | 19:45:27, January 27, 2009 CET | From | Free thinking Party | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | It makes sense to consolidate the two roles, especially if the hereditary role is meaningless, not even a tourist attraction as it is not a monarch-like role, we would therefore support this bill |
Date | 20:43:29, January 28, 2009 CET | From | Christian Democrat Party | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | Emissary???? I'd feel sorry for whoever has to carry that title. |
Date | 22:15:50, January 28, 2009 CET | From | TW@ | To | Debating the BIG change |
Message | The TW@ party disagrees |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||||
yes |
Total Seats: 532 | |||||
no |
Total Seats: 133 | |||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Moderation will not implement nation renaming requests where the proposed name does not comply with the requirements set out in the Nation Renaming Guide: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6364 |
Random quote: "Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: the communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.'" - Phelps Adams |