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 Reform, 3102
Details
Submitted by[?]: Action Canrillaise
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 3103
Description[?]:
| The current cabinet proposal system is no longer valid in a multiparty system. It functioned well under a two-party system, but the arrival of the KCP has altered this reality. For the sake of democracy, we propose that such restrictions be lifted so that Kanjor may be spared the horrors of having no government for any extended period of time. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The constitutional right and responsibility to propose a cabinet to the legislature.
Old value:: Only the largest party can propose a cabinet.
Current: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Proposed: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:11:08, April 08, 2011 CET | From | Action Canrillaise | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal Reform, 3102 |
| Message | We wish to bring the États-Généraux's attention to Mrs. Stonemason's statement on the administrative reform bill: "The current restrictions leave parliament free of any work at all, that is you idea of manageable? We have to say no, no, no - more accountability, more representation and more government efficiency." Clearly, she has stated her desire for an overall accountable, representative, and efficient government, of which this bill offers. We have compromised with the KCP on matters of "democracy" and will hope that they yield to the truth of what this bill seeks to convey. |
| Date | 22:45:57, April 08, 2011 CET | From | Kanjoran Conservative Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal Reform, 3102 |
| Message | Kanjor is not without government, but remains under the government of the AK. We feel that if all parties could make proposals this issue would have been even further exacerbated. We do not support this, it does not lead to efficient government. |
| Date | 00:01:56, April 09, 2011 CET | From | Action Canrillaise | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal Reform, 3102 |
| Message | There is no reason to debate such things. Either you support it or you don't, there are only two options for such a proposal. If all parties had to ability to propose a cabinet then there would be no prolonged negotiations because we would be able to display all our options immediately. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes |
Total Seats: 51 | ||
| no | Total Seats: 50 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The grey space in the east is populated by the forum-based countries, known in-game as the former colonies or the "Third World". These countries are managed by the Third World Coordinator but players can request control of individual countries in the Third World Control Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=8302 |
| Random quote: "Thousands of Zardic soldiers were sacrificed so that the Zardic government could gain control of a few buildings and Theodoro could pretend to be Augustus the Great. This is the kind of jingoistic ideology Zardugal would bring to the Security Council. They will throw countless lives away in pursuit of former glory." - Prince Akhaias, former Coburan royal |