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 2144
Details
Submitted by[?]: Covenanters (IA)
Status[?]: defeated
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: May 2145
Description[?]:
| Proposing a Cabinet |
Proposals
Article 1
The responsibilites of Head of Government will be conducted by the Redneck Party
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the Sol Alliance Party
Article 3
The responsibilites of Food and Agriculture will be conducted by the Covenanters (IA)
Article 4
The responsibilites of Environment and Tourism will be conducted by the Luthori Green Party
Article 5
The responsibilites of Trade and Industry will be conducted by the United Conservative Party
Article 6
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Covenanters (IA)
Article 7
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the Social Calvinist Unionist Party
Article 8
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the Redneck Party
Article 9
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the United Conservative Party
Article 10
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Catholic Peoples Party
Article 11
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the United Conservative Party
Article 12
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the Seosavists Republican party
Article 13
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the Seosavists Republican party
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:27:02, November 21, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Um, you do realise the UCP cannot be trusted with the armed forces of Luthori, I predict atrocities. |
| Date | 13:40:49, November 21, 2005 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | If you have majority backing, His Majesty Rzeczpospolita King Richard would be duty bound to propose the LEC's cabinet proposal. |
| Date | 13:52:54, November 21, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Your first cabinet proposal (which I suggested) had the backing of the RnP, SRP, RzP, LEC, and SAP, and I thought you also supported it. The only change in his proposal is that the military of Luthori will be commanded by a madman. |
| Date | 23:20:32, November 21, 2005 CET | From | United Conservative Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | LOL!!! LEC: it is YOU who is the madman. Any supporter of sodomists and immoral behaviour cannot be regarded as sane. Oh, and the UCP is totally opposed to atrocities. Being prepared to defend Luthori against its enemies is not a crime: it is patriotism. Your constant desire to reduce our armed forces into a gay-bar and knitting club is the most dangerous proposals ever put to the citizens of Luthori. It marks you as a traitor. |
| Date | 04:09:48, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Your declaration of patriotism is a declaration of insanity. Anyone who considers "for the state" as a reasonable justification is not to be trusted with the military. So you won't use the military: - as a lynch mob to hunt homosexuals and non-Christians? -as your own personal army to wage war on non-Christian nations? -as a de-facto police force to enforce Christian morals? |
| Date | 12:28:35, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Social Calvinist Unionist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Nay, nay, and thrice nay! I care not for my position in the government, but I care for the people of Luthori. If the UCP was in charge of our military, he would use his fanatical beliefs to make our state turn into a christian theocracy, with the backing of the military. He would only let christians join the ranks of the army, which is wrong in every way. ALL citizens of the Commonwealth have the right to fight for our glorious fatherland. |
| Date | 13:08:12, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | sadly RzP, the DUP wants to turn us into the "Holy Luthori Empire," so this will only harden his resolve to pass this cabinet bill, so the best thing to do is to vote no. |
| Date | 13:41:16, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | While the DUP wholly supports the idea of the UCP running the Ministry of Defence, we would rather see an exclusively Christian government. However, the Sovereign has a duty to propose any cabinet coalition with majority support. He could only assume the Redneck proposal had the support of all those parties in it. This is clearly not the case. Surely, LEC, it would only be natural that should you win the election in the Christian League then it would be natural for our home country to become a Holy Empire? His Majesty asks whether the Redneck Party wishes to withdraw this second proposal, or put it to the vote? |
| Date | 14:09:33, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | I'm not going to win the elections because I am too progressive. After all, I am the only candidate who doesn't want to start a crusade against all Muslims. The Jacobites have three votes, the TNP have one, and I have one. Not a good start to an election. |
| Date | 14:13:20, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Believe it or not I would prefer the LEC to the other candidates. I get on with the Jacobites on a personal level but they're already causing problems in the Alliance for the Recognition of Ecclesias, as would the TNP with their anti-Islamic stance. Frankly they both make the DUP look moderate, and that's not good on any level! |
| Date | 14:14:37, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | How many Catholics are there in the CL anyway. So far I count six. |
| Date | 14:16:35, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | The Jacobites are harassing the Muslim League, claiming that they want to tear down the Caliphate and create a crusader kingdom of Badara. Not a good start to a career as representative of all Catholics. |
| Date | 14:18:44, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Only six out of forty, are you sure? There must be at least 7 as 5 votes have been cast, and the Jacobites and CPP have both abstained. I'd have thought about half the membership, 20 parties, were Catholic. The Catholic Militarist League has 10 members, who I presume are all members of the CL, plus yourselves and the TNP makes twelve... |
| Date | 14:19:59, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Well, they aren't voting, and if all the CML are in the CL, the Jacobites have the election. |
| Date | 17:15:07, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Redneck Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | The RP will not change their mind on the issue. You can always change to what you please, but we believe UCP are good people, and we will be forced to vote against any future proposal.. |
| Date | 17:31:15, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | So the RnP want to put this to the vote, with the rebels still included? |
| Date | 23:59:46, November 22, 2005 CET | From | Social Calvinist Unionist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Opressing the minorities is not the way one runs a member of the free world. I fear that if the UCP is given control of defence, then he will use his power to turn our state into a hell-hole for those who aren't land-owning christians (at least he isn't racist....) BTW, does Internal Affairs control the police? Because usually they do, but I'm not sure in the current situation. |
| Date | 06:27:40, November 23, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Officially the Ministry of Internal Affairs would control all law enforcement agencies, customs, and the prison system. They would also control the coast guard during peacetime, assuming we have a coast guard. |
| Date | 06:49:37, November 23, 2005 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Oh and DUP, the Jacobites have four votes, and have given their support to a ban on religion in Al'Badara. Compared to this guy, the UCP looks moderate left! |
| Date | 13:49:07, November 23, 2005 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of February 2144 |
| Message | Having just found out the Pope recognised by the CML is an atheist, I'm worried, but can't change the outcome of the election. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 319 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 314 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 117 |
| Random fact: Particracy isn't just a game, it also has a forum, where players meet up to discuss role-playing, talk about in-game stuff, run their own newspaper or organisation and even discuss non-game and real-life issues! Check it out: http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "Suburbia is where the developer bulldozes out the trees, then names the streets after them." - Bill Vaughn |