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: Treaty Withdrawl Bill of 2954
Details
Submitted by[?]: Hutorian Conservative Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill proposes the withdrawal from a treaty. It will require half of the legislature to vote in favor[?]. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: June 2956
Description[?]:
| .......... |
Proposals
Article 1
Withdraw from the International agreement to ban torture.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:39:22, June 16, 2010 CET | From | Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM) | To | Debating the Treaty Withdrawl Bill of 2954 |
| Message | Hon Cheryl Macintosh MP, CLP Leader: Madam Speaker, a return to HNP flip-flopping. Let me just remind the House that it was the NSC that took us into this treaty, and now it is the NSC that propose to take us out. Madam Speaker, why did they join this treaty in the first place? They joined this treaty because they were posturing, Madam Speaker. They were posturing themselves in such a way so as to be able to make the people think that they were moderate, committed to civil liberties. Madam Speaker, now that the people of this country have been deceived to a sufficient degree, they can make an enormous U-turn. Madam Speaker, let us prepare for torture to be added to the long list of awful deeds that this government intends to commit. Let it never be said again that the CLP scare-monger, for their supposed scare-mongering got nowhere near to the reality of what this government is capable of. |
| Date | 21:50:17, June 16, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Treaty Withdrawl Bill of 2954 |
| Message | Rt Hon Duke McCullum MP, Leader of the House, Madam Speaker, the NSC are only making a U-turn on this Treaty because of an issue raised by the UFD and then alerted to us by the CLP. Whilst we are in this Treaty, the state cannot enslave prisoners of war as we would like. That is the sole reason for withdrawing from this Treaty. Besides Madam Speaker, was it not the CLP who always wanted out of these treaties? So why are they not in the yes box? |
| Date | 21:54:57, June 16, 2010 CET | From | Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM) | To | Debating the Treaty Withdrawl Bill of 2954 |
| Message | Madam Speaker, the NSC ratified this treaty, so they must have read the treaty? Or did they join the treaty without knowing what was in it? Madam Speaker, it is more likely that the NSC have simply changed their minds. One minute they believe it is best if they are seen to protect the rights of PoWs. Now, to court favour with the UFD, they wish to see them enslaved. Madam Speaker, it is quite a shift! |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 174 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 175 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 42 |
| Random fact: You can view who's online (i.e. been active the last 10 minutes) at the bottom of the menu (either at the top or the side). |
| Random quote: "To live anywhere in the world today and be against equality because of race or color is like living in Alaska and being against snow." - William Faulkner, Essays, Speeches and Public Letters |