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: Defence Industry
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative Alternative
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: July 2937
Description[?]:
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The nation's defence industry.
Old value:: The state owns all defence industries.
Current: Defence industries are privately owned but subsidised by the state.
Proposed: Defence industries are privately owned and not subsidised.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:47:19, May 11, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Defence Industry |
| Message | Marquess Samuel Haskins, HNP Interim Leader; Mr Speaker, is the Hutori National Party the only party in Hutori, that does not wish to see our nation become weak? These constant reforms to weaken our defences and army combined with our limited use of weapons in warfare shows how incompetent our nations leaders have become. We do not want our nation to become one of the worst defended nations on Terra, we want to see a strong Hutorian military...something which parties like the Hutorian Bloc wish to destroy. |
| Date | 20:02:57, May 11, 2010 CET | From | Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM) | To | Debating the Defence Industry |
| Message | Rt Hon Michael Price MP, CLP Defence Spokesman: Mr Speaker, it is high time that the HNP's myths were laid to rest and a comprehensive justification for so-called 'weak' policies was made. Regarding this bill in particular, one could easily read it as a proposal for a stronger military. Indeed, were I so inclined, I could say that the HNP's opposition to this bill meant that they were the ones weak on defence. I shall not make that argument. Mr Speaker, the CLP support this bill because the private sector is much more efficient and competent at delivering services. Given that the state is pretty much the sole purchaser of defence equipment and services, there is no need for state subsidy nor state ownership. If the job can be done best in the private sector, then surely all those that support strong defence of the realm would support that move? Unless of course, they are blinded by socialist ideology. Now, Mr Speaker, on the wider issue of defence. The CLP takes the traditional view that the primary purpose of government is to provide defence of the realm. This is historically why governments were formed; they were not formed to ensure social justice, the management of industry, nor even to ensure a courts system. No, it was to ensure the security of borders. Mr Speaker, the CLP maintain that this is the primary function of a government. Mr Speaker, the HNP peddle the myth that a state is at its strongest when it is at its most aggressive. Mr Speaker, the CLP vehemently reject that point of view. A state is at its strongest when it is humane, moral and internationalist in outlook. Mr Speaker, taking a stand and reducing our nuclear arsenal, our use of weapons of mass destruction and banning our military's use of land mines gives us the high ground. It also gives us an immense leverage in diplomatic missions and negotiations. Mr Speaker, the myth must be vanquished. An aggressive state does not make a secure state. |
| Date | 23:26:46, May 11, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Defence Industry |
| Message | Marquess Haskins MP, HNP Interim Leader, Mr Speaker, what we say is not what the CLP conscrues as a myth. These military policies DO weaken our great nation! They say that having the moral high ground is better? It is hardly better whenever our country has been flattened by another country who can use Weapons of Mass Destruction. We are better off having the option of being able to use WMD's whenever we want and other nations will not cross us because they know that we can destroy them in an instant! Mr Speaker, currently the CLP would only allow us to use WMD's if we needed to retaliate. They would allow our nation to take a hit first before using our nuclear arsenal? They need hundreds of thousands of our citizens to die in order to preserve the moral high ground? Mr Speaker, the CLP have weakened our nation enough as it is. We should stop them from completely destroying our nations defenses. |
| Date | 09:57:18, May 12, 2010 CET | From | Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM) | To | Debating the Defence Industry |
| Message | Mr Speaker, our possession of weapons of mass destruction has never meant that we are safe nor secure. If it ever gets to the stage where we have to use such weapons, we are doomed anyway. They are quite unnecessary. If another nation is determined to defeat us, they will not care whether or not we have such weapons for they will go straight ahead and destroy us. Mr Speaker, there is no justification at all for weapons of mass destruction. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 155 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 228 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 8 |
| Random fact: The Real-Life Equivalents Index is a valuable resource for finding out the in-game equivalents of real-life cultures, languages, religions, people and places: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6731 |
| Random quote: "I bet their mothers don't love them. Many Trigunian women are so cold. I mean it's a racist hellhole in parts." - Tirza Sommer, former Dorvish politician |