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: Infrastructure Reform Act of 3090
Details
Submitted by[?]: Christian Democratic Party
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: June 3091
Description[?]:
| Article 1 - Despite any possibly worries, our engineers can make this a safe process, and can generate large amounts of energy to help reduce our dependence on unclean resources. Article 2 - More privatization of various sectors of the economy and infrastructure. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on nuclear power.
Old value:: The government does not take any position on nuclear power.
Current: The government encourages nuclear power (subsidies, tax relief etc).
Proposed: The government encourages nuclear power (subsidies, tax relief etc).
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Train Operating Companies (TOC).
Old value:: There is a single publicly owned TOC.
Current: Private companies operate TOCs throughout the country.
Proposed: Private companies operate regional TOC's. The national service is provided by a publicly owned, national TOC.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:21:43, March 15, 2011 CET | From |  Revolutionary Worker's Party | To | Debating the Infrastructure Reform Act of 3090 |
| Message | We agree only with the first article. Could you possibly separate both of them in two different bills? You will have our support in the first OCC: Not that it means anything since I hold 0 seats right now lol |
| Date | 00:20:44, March 16, 2011 CET | From | Christian Democratic Party | To | Debating the Infrastructure Reform Act of 3090 |
| Message | OOC: I'm sure if I lose the majority that article 2 will be overturned. Just wanted to get through some changes to fit my views and also hopefully help out the new parties with some establishing a platform. |
| Date | 06:28:15, March 16, 2011 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Infrastructure Reform Act of 3090 |
| Message | Article 1- No,no,no,no,no,no,no. When or if you lose your majority, I will try and overturn article 1 for sure. We do not need nuclear power, it is not 100% safe like coal or gas and would you like to be living next door to a nuclear reactor? I certainty wouldn't! OOC: Do the recent events in Japan scare you about nuclear power at all? |
| Date | 19:28:23, March 16, 2011 CET | From | Christian Democratic Party | To | Debating the Infrastructure Reform Act of 3090 |
| Message | OOC: That is one of the reason's I voted for it. Despite that incident, very unfortunate, I still believe it is a good way to go. The dangers can be great, but only the only trouble that has been caused by nuclear power recently was due to natural disasters. For a counterpoint, I look at France who runs mostly off of it and safely as far as I know. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 376 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 186 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 188 |
| Random fact: In cases where players have failed to clearly and accurately reference their nation's RP laws in the "Bills under debate" section, Moderation will rule them invalid if a challenge is made to their validity. |
| Random quote: "Education: the inculcation of the incomprehensible into the indifferent by the incompetent." - John Maynard Keynes |