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: Cabinet Proposal of February 2139
Details
Submitted by[?]: Freedom Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill presents the formation of a cabinet. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. Traditionally, parties in the proposal vote yes, others (the opposition) vote no. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in and all parties in the proposal have voted yes, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline.
Voting deadline: October 2139
Description[?]:
| Proposing a Cabinet To make it fair, all the big parties were given three positions. The CDP deserves one more position, but no room, so i gave them a big ministry, in Finance. I hope this suits everyone |
Proposals
Article 1
The responsibilites of Head of Government will be conducted by the Conservative Party
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the 
Freedom Party
Article 3
The responsibilites of Food and Agriculture will be conducted by the Libertarian Alcoholic Party II
Article 4
The responsibilites of Environment and Tourism will be conducted by the Conservative Party
Article 5
The responsibilites of Trade and Industry will be conducted by the Libertarian Alcoholic Party II
Article 6
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Freedom Party
Article 7
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the Liberal Imperialist Party
Article 8
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the Civic Democratic Party
Article 9
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the Conservative Party
Article 10
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Liberal Imperialist Party
Article 11
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the Freedom Party
Article 12
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the Libertarian Alcoholic Party II
Article 13
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the Liberal Imperialist Party
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:17:31, November 11, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | We believe the present coalition should remain in office as it has retained its majority. |
| Date | 13:51:22, November 11, 2005 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | Because the Libertarian Alcholic Party has a lot in common with authoritarian socialists :Roll: |
| Date | 13:51:52, November 11, 2005 CET | From | Radical Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | We concur with the analysis of the RSDP. |
| Date | 13:53:49, November 11, 2005 CET | From | Radical Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | Just saying "authoritarian socialists" is getting old. The Libertarian Alcholic Party does not have much in common with authoritarian nationalists (CP, LIP) either. And, again, the largest party which actually *is* pro-freedom is excluded from the government in favour of religious reactionaries. This is a bad cabinet proposal and it deserves to be voted down, or amended. |
| Date | 14:38:50, November 11, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | Indeed, do you really think you can silence the democratic opposition by calling them "authoritarian socialists"? Yet who is authoritarian here? The two largest parties are excluded from your Cabinet proposal, and the party which holds the key to the success or failure of this Cabinet proposal (the LAP) gets only three positions in it. |
| Date | 19:18:27, November 11, 2005 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | Three positions when you get 65 seats is a good deal, especially as both myself and the CP and LIP have three as well even though we are bigger. We also happened to support the LAP candidate in the HoS election as well which was another bargain for the LAP |
| Date | 19:19:16, November 11, 2005 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | The RFP had to be excluded while they remain an unreliable ally that courts both sides of the political divide trying to cling to power. |
| Date | 20:53:55, November 11, 2005 CET | From | RSDP - Democratic Front | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | In other words, you don't want to work with them because they are willing to debate issues constructively and try to reach a compromise which is satisfactory for both sides? |
| Date | 21:19:50, November 11, 2005 CET | From | Radical Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | Centrism is a clear reason for excluding parties! Of course, the Freedom Party representatives would never get personal issues get in the way of a Libertarian government. Lets sell out to religious authoritarian conservatives instead! |
| Date | 02:00:01, November 13, 2005 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2139 |
| Message | Oh yes, i forgot the Freedom Party would love to ally itself with a party that called us arseholes, that told us to fuck off, that routinely accuses me of bias in moderation decisions. That also has a hatred of our beloved Conservative Party |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 343 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 256 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow official national flags of real-life nations or flags which are very prominent and recognisable (eg. the flags of the European Union, the United Nations, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or the Confederate States of America). |
| Random quote: "The avoidance of taxes is the only intellectual pursuit that still carries any reward." - John Maynard Keynes |