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: The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage
Details
Submitted by[?]: People's Party of Rutania
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: September 2822
Description[?]:
| We, at the PPR, believe that the protection of Rutanian historical sites should be protected and maintained to a national standard. We hope the stages described below will help maintain Rutania as a land of culture and historic importance. - There should be a national minimum level of protection for sites of unique importance. - Assets of cultural, historical, scientific or artistic value are identified by the regions local goverment. - Central government encourages protection of these sites/items (to the national standard) by guaranteed funding to local businesses. We thank you in advance for your comments. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National, cultural and historic sites and monuments.
Old value:: This matter is left up to the local governments.
Current: The state actively protects scenery, localities, cultural, and historical sites; it maintains an agency to preserve them untouched if public interest so requires.
Proposed: The state encourages and funds private efforts towards the protection of cultural and historical heritage.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:43:24, September 21, 2009 CET | From |  Liberal Democratic Party | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | We would prefer that the State actively protects scenery, localities, cultural, and historical sites and maintains an agency to preserve them untouched if public interest so requires. |
| Date | 16:44:04, September 21, 2009 CET | From | Liberal Democratic Party | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | We would prefer that the State actively protects scenery, localities, cultural, and historical sites and maintains an agency to preserve them untouched if public interest so requires. |
| Date | 17:08:43, September 21, 2009 CET | From | United Democrats | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | We will support this. |
| Date | 18:44:21, September 21, 2009 CET | From | People's Party of Rutania | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | In response to the LDP comment: We fully appreciate the State should play a part in the protection of localities with historical and cultural significance, but we argue that the current proposal is adequate in this instance. The State would actively encourage the protection of scenery, as identified by the local government. In addition, the funding of private enterprise would be beneficial to the local economy and importantly, local pride. |
| Date | 01:31:28, September 22, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | We certainly agree with the sentiment of this legislation, and we commend the PPR for this initiative - this having been said, we believe this is a duty for local governments. There's no inherent reason why the federal government should be responsible for the protection of heritage sites. We prefer the current legislation. |
| Date | 10:56:02, September 22, 2009 CET | From | People's Party of Rutania | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | We thank the Rutanian Heritage Party for their comments, but we would argue that the proposed legislation would give consistent protection of national treasures, rather than protection based on the regions ability or priorities. We believe a national minimum standard is just common-sense. |
| Date | 16:16:24, September 22, 2009 CET | From | Revolutionary Workers Party | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | Does the PPR believe that local governments are somehow unable to identify what are important aspects of Rutanian culture, as opposed to centralised governments located often many miles away? |
| Date | 16:29:19, September 22, 2009 CET | From | People's Party of Rutania | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | Could the RWP please clarify their last comment? We believe that only local government can identify these aspects of Rutanian culture. Our party clearly stated in the description that, "Assets of cultural, historical, scientific or artistic value are identified by the regions local goverment". |
| Date | 21:15:46, September 23, 2009 CET | From | Revolutionary Workers Party | To | Debating the The protection of Rutanian culture and heritage |
| Message | So this means the RPP wish to create a layer or bureaucracy: local governments defining the culture, and then sending plans to the centralised government to implement them! |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 59 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 246 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Make sure to check out Particracy's wiki. http://particracy.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page |
| Random quote: "We shall fight against them, throw them in prisons and destroy them." - Vladimir Putin |