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: Federalist Manifesto Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM)
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: January 2953
Description[?]:
| This Act introduces the Conservative-Libertarian Party's commitment to federalism. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Policy on the organization of police/law enforcement
Old value:: There is a national police department, funded by the government.
Current: There is a national police department funded by the national government and there are local police departments, funded by local governments.
Proposed: There is a national police department funded by the national government and there are local police departments, funded by local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards police presence.
Old value:: The police patrol all property at all times.
Current: The police patrol public property at all times.
Proposed: Presence of the police is left to the local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:20:38, June 11, 2010 CET | From | Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM) | To | Debating the Federalist Manifesto Act |
| Message | Hon Cheryl Macintosh MP, CLP Leader: Madam Speaker, I am delighted to be making my first speech in my capacity of leader of the Conservative-Libertarian Party. Madam Speaker, it is an honour to be leading the CLP and I hope that my leadership will mark a new start and a fresh direction for the Party and, eventually, for this country. Madam Speaker, I would like first of all to my late father, the former Foreign Secretary, Viscount Harold Macintosh. My politics are very much inspired by him and following his death, I was inspired to seek election to this chamber. I know that people from all parties respected his work and his quiet determination and I hope that I can contribute to this country as much as he did. Madam Speaker, I believe, as my father did before me, that for too long, Hutori has been over-centralised. Madam Speaker, decisions are made by the national government on all aspects of life and the powers of local councils are very slim and slight indeed. The Conservative-Libertarian Party is as guilty of this as any other. The only real contribution we have ever made to local democracy is the provision that local mayors must be elected. Madam Speaker, given that our Party has its own tradition of giving local executives a say in the leadership, it is completely wrong that we do not give local councils the same sort of say in policy. The CLP was founded on the values of freedom and democracy. Madam Speaker, we have long argued that the people should be as free as possible and in control of as many areas of their lives as possible. We are very much a libertarian party. And yet, Madam Speaker, no CLP leader has ever argued the case for federalism. I know that my Rt Hon friend, Marchioness Chukulate, is a keen federalist and, had she been elected would have made these same arguments. Madam Speaker, if we want the people to be as free as possible, and in control of their own destinies, then the best way to achieve that is by dispersing power. By dispersing power to local councils, we ultimately put people in control of their lives. Government is much nearer to the individual and so his opportunity to construct change is enhanced. Madam Speaker, at the moment, people on the Isle of Sutton are subject to the same presumptions as the people of Bekenial. Given the vast differences that exist throughout this country, and the diversity of people living here, laws should not be constructed under a 'one size fits all' umbrella. Madam Speaker, by pushing power down, the libertarian ideals are achieved, and that is why socialists traditionally do not like giving power up, for they lose control. People enjoy freedom, Madam Speaker, and freedom is more likely to be had if power is dispersed. Of course, there is an element of risk for those of a libertarian persuasion. There is the chance that there will be a multitude of socialist councils and many libertarians would prefer to see power therefore retained at a central level so we could assure all people of libertarianism. And yet, Madam Speaker, where has that got us? By clinging onto these powers, we have enabled socialists to control virtually all aspects of our lives. This would have been much more difficult to achieve had power been dispersed. Madam Speaker, I know that many of my honourable friends will be concerned about where this leaves our party's commitment to the cornerstone of "Constitutional conservatism". Many will be concerned that the sovereignty of this Parliament will be reduced, that the country will be divided and our traditional unitarism will be lost. Madam Speaker, I do not hold back when I say that this is very much a radical distribution of power, perhaps the most radical we have seen in over a century. Parliamentary sovereignty will not be lost for, ultimately, if it came to it, Parliament would be able to take back any powers it wishes. There are of course some powers that should never be devolved. Madam Speaker, issues such as foreign policy, trade policy, defence policy and immigration policy must remain Kingdom-wide affairs and not devolved to the subnational level. However, Madam Speaker, many and more issues can be decided by the 74 councils that exist in Hutori. We must look more at passing away power and letting people be nearer to government. Madam Speaker, this is my underlying philosophy. This is a big departure for the Conservative-Libertarian Party and one of the greatest shifts in policy that we have ever undertaken. It is akin to Duchess Thompson's decision to accept public sector involvement in health and education. It is akin to Duke Havers' decision to support pacifism. Madam Speaker, it builds on Baroness Peters' commitment to see cultural issues devolved. Madam Speaker, federalism is not only philosophically sound, but it is also better on practical grounds. Some moves towards federalism have already begun. Madam Speaker, does our flag not recognise and respect the five great and historic regions of Hutori? Eventually, Madam Speaker, I would like to see an electoral system that will better recognise these localities as equally important. Whether this be through equal representation or a pseudo-proportional system, I do not know. Madam Speaker, the prospect of giving up power is one that daunts many leaders. But, Madam Speaker, I believe it is the remedy that Hutori so greatly needs. |
| Date | 16:35:53, June 11, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Federalist Manifesto Act |
| Message | Rt Hon Baron Mancini MP, Finance Minister Madam Speaker, there needs to be strong central governance in Hutori. This Bill sees our nation security potentially drastically weakened. The police need to be free to police and when it comes to police fairly treating all citizens, this is very difficult to maintain when there can be so many different policing policies being enacted by local governments. The NSC has always advocated a strong central government and unity throughout Hutori, we believe that the system is fairer this way to all. This Bill could see - if local governments have extreme representatives, serious oppression placed upon the people and the NSC want a fair society for all. Madam Speaker, we also welcome the honorable lady to her position as CLP Leader. We wish her well, but not too well as we currently enjoy being the largest party in Hutori. |
| Date | 16:45:10, June 11, 2010 CET | From | Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM) | To | Debating the Federalist Manifesto Act |
| Message | Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his words of welcome. I am not surprised at his opposition to federalism. For while he says that he wants all people to be treated fairly, what he actually means is that he wants all people to be equal. Madam Speaker, we know that the gentleman no longer supports the policies that were held by the HNP, so he can imagine what would have happened had the HNP and FFF managed to gain a majority together and form a coalition. The level of oppression would have been colossal. Madam Speaker, a federalist structure would have prevented that as it would have been much more difficult for central government to gain such massive and instant control. Madam Speaker, the gentleman raises a good philosophical point about the possibility of oppressive local government. Of course, his is the party that is about to make it illegal to practice religion, so he needs to look at his own party before he starts making such statements! Madam Speaker, of course there is this chance of oppressive local government. Bekenial City Council still has a large fascist representation, as do some other local councils in Adelia. However, this should not worry us too much. Madam Speaker, federalism works very much like the free market, which we know will not endear the idea to the NSC! Madam Speaker, federalism gives people choice and opportunity. If people do not like the policies being introduced in Council X then they can move to Council Y, which will be much more free and welcoming. The fact that Council Y would attract more people, meaning it had more revenue to spend on services, Council X would be forced to look at its policies. Indeed, the people of Council X would look over and see what the people at Council Y were getting, and vote for the parties that promised them that. Madam Speaker, the practice of the free market shows how this would work. Of course, moving from oppressive Council X to the free Council Y is not as simple as I have just made it sound but it is a great deal easier than having to move from oppressive COUNTRY A to the free Country B. That is why it works a treat, Madam Speaker, for it ensures that, at the very most, only pockets of the country will be oppressive, instead of the entire country. And even then, those pockets would not remain oppressive for long. |
| Date | 19:13:42, June 11, 2010 CET | From | United Forces of Decay | To | Debating the Federalist Manifesto Act |
| Message | The United Forces of Decay dislike the idea of federalism and will never support laws which support any steps leading to some kind of federal state. People do not gain more freedom just because the state they live in is a federal one. The only thing that would change is that there would be smaller governments with some, in this case very important, competences, by which the federal government would loose control over a very important sector. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 94 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 297 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When your party holds the foreign affairs department, you can create new treaties. However, before writing anything new, it is a good idea to search for existing treaties which already accomplish what you desire. |
| Random quote: "There is no problem that cannot be solved with diplomacy or debate. Anyone who thinks otherwise does not need a gun, but a direct ride to a mental health clinic." - Ascentio Cartaginese, former Istalian politician |