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 March 3299
Details
Submitted by[?]: Patterson House
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: November 3299
Description[?]:
| A multipartisanship cabinet OOC: And I thought I was a grammar snob. |
Proposals
Article 1
The responsibilites of Head of Government will be conducted by the Patterson House
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the Stanton House
Article 3
The responsibilites of Food and Agriculture will be conducted by the Stanton House
Article 4
The responsibilites of Environment and Tourism will be conducted by the House of Lligro
Article 5
The responsibilites of Trade and Industry will be conducted by the 
Beluz Democratic Karavist Party
Article 6
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Beluz Democratic Karavist Party
Article 7
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the House of Lligro
Article 8
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the Beluz Democratic Karavist Party
Article 9
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the Patterson House
Article 10
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Williams Family
Article 11
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the Patterson House
Article 12
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the House of Lligro
Article 13
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the Williams Family
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:34:53, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Beluz Democratic Karavist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | This doesn't mean condition 3 or 7. 3) The Defence Minister is from the Karav Family 7) The Education/Culture Minister is from either the Lligro Family or Tory Party. So the Karav family will vote "No" on this. -- It's not the most wise thing to put the Tories in charge of Science/Technology. They're the ones who wanted to cut funding to that ministry by 66%: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=346322 |
| Date | 13:53:47, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Patterson House | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | You must understand that this is not your cabinet. It is mine. I tried to meet some of your criteria, but I don't this to be your cabinet. I assign the positions based on how I approve of their policies. Not by how you approve of their policies. |
| Date | 14:00:42, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Beluz Democratic Karavist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | Good luck getting this to pass... Cabinets aren't about policies; leave that to the parliament/legislature. I'm making simple suggestions, and telling you under what conditions I will vote "Yes" on a cabinet proposal. If they don't meet the conditions, I won't vote yes. It's the same with every bill; if a bill doesn't fulfil certain things, I won't vote "Yes" on it. This is not your cabinet. No-one owns the cabinet. It's your cabinet when all the ministries belong to you. You wanted a "bipartisan" cabinet, so that would mean 2 houses. You want a unitary cabinet? That will mean all houses. You can do whatever you want, but if you think cutting a ministry's funding by 66% is a good "policy" then all the Karavs can do is laugh. |
| Date | 14:22:06, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Patterson House | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | A cabinet is a group of advisors for the executive ruler. So since I am the Count, it is my cabinet. I just want it to be a multipartisanship cabinet. Also, your demands are excessive. You are basically trying to make your own cabinet. I met some of your demands, try to compromise. And cabinets are about policies. As I said a cabinet is a group of advisors, so I assign people there position based on what their policies are for that position. Please try to compromise I met all but two demands of yours, don't be stubborn. |
| Date | 14:27:41, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Beluz Democratic Karavist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | You're not the executive ruler. If any position is executive, it's the Prime Minister. The cabinet's job isn't to advise you. You're mostly ceremonial, like I was. Your main job is to serve as a symbol of unity and sovereignty in Beluzia, so that you may represent us. You'll also be able to command the military in times of war. Being the Count doesn't make it your cabinet. It's still the people's cabinet. --- None of that matters. Whatever the case in regards to everything above, we will not vote "Yes" unless it meets certain demands, regardless of how "excessive" you consider them. |
| Date | 14:29:30, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Patterson House | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | I consider them to be extremely excessive, and you to be more stubborn than a mule. |
| Date | 14:36:44, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Beluz Democratic Karavist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | Your Excellency, It's pretty obvious that you're the one being stubborn, here. Being the Count doesn't give you exclusive right to do whatever you want. You can get your way in Negunia, like I do in Iker Ado and Bailon, but these are federal matters. I will repeat: I don't care if you find them excessive. You cannot force us to vote "Yes" |
| Date | 17:31:01, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Williams Family | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | I think the DeKaravs might want to consider compromising, this cabinet doesn't look bad at all...but if not so be it. |
| Date | 17:31:21, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Williams Family | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | I mean...they did get Foreign Affairs. |
| Date | 23:08:22, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Beluz Democratic Karavist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | Who are the "DeKaravs" you speak of? We are the Karav family. We are from the House DeKarav. "De" means "of" if you have forgotten again. |
| Date | 23:25:56, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Williams Family | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | It was an oversight - my apologies. I'll try not to let it happen again. |
| Date | 23:42:06, May 05, 2012 CET | From | Beluz Democratic Karavist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of March 3299 |
| Message | Trial is not enough unless a verdict is given. Apologies will not be accepted. Nothing more needs to be said. This bill's failure is inevitable. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 43 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 56 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Make sure to check out Particracy's wiki. http://particracy.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page |
| Random quote: "The avoidance of taxes is the only intellectual pursuit that still carries any reward." - John Maynard Keynes |