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: Private Post Regulation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Socialist Front
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: October 2135
Description[?]:
| We must make sure private post offices aren't providing illegal services or helping customers hide from the law. They need to be regulated in that respect. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the post office
Old value:: There is a nationalised post office. Private post office agencies are allowed to exist, and the services provided by them are not regulated.
Current: There is a nationalised post office agency in the nation. Private ones are banned.
Proposed: There is a nationalised post office agency. Private post offices are allowed to exist but the services provided by them are regulated.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:48:19, October 30, 2005 CET | From | Aldurian Libertarian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Private Post Regulation Act |
| Message | We must ensure that private post offices observe at least the privacy law. We agree with the legislation. |
| Date | 08:16:28, October 30, 2005 CET | From | New Aldurian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Private Post Regulation Act |
| Message | We question how much regulation the national government intends to place upon these private postal services. Would the USF care to elaborate on this matter? |
| Date | 17:47:03, October 30, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Front | To | Debating the Private Post Regulation Act |
| Message | The amount of regulation is to be decided by the government as a whole. This amount may vary, according to the laws being practiced in the land. No absolute direct control, overseeing yes; enforcement of laws already in existence. |
| Date | 19:22:00, October 30, 2005 CET | From | Aldurian Moderates | To | Debating the Private Post Regulation Act |
| Message | What constitutes an illegal service? Does this assume that all private post offices hide people? This bill does nothing more than give the government greater control. We already arrest and try any individual or company found guilty of a crime. Why the need for extra oversight? Especially since the bill only stipulates the enforcement of the current laws. If the government fails to uphold the current laws now, then that shows a weakness of the government not the private post offices. Or am I led to believe that the "private" designation denotes immunity to the laws of the land? |
| Date | 19:34:34, October 30, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Front | To | Debating the Private Post Regulation Act |
| Message | "Private" often does denote such things. Not as a rule, but in practice. The post offices are not regulated, meaning they are left to their own devices. Who's to say what they do or don't do? We don't know, which is why we need this regulation. |
| Date | 22:07:11, October 30, 2005 CET | From | Aldurian Libertarian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Private Post Regulation Act |
| Message | Not regulated post office can impose 'EULA style' abusive terms of use. This ought to be banned. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 270 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 131 |
| Random fact: For more information on Particracy's former colonial nations, check out http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6640 |
| Random quote: "They can call us communists and fascists all they want but, their words are of a hollow ring with the blood of innocence at their feet." - Mathew Jameson, former Hutorian politician |