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: The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment
Details
Submitted by[?]: União Democrática do Tukarali
Status[?]: defeated
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: May 3326
Description[?]:
| . |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Forest management.
Old value:: Local governments may set up forestry agencies. Where they do not, forestry is on a commercial basis.
Current: There is a national agency which exists side-by-side with commercial forestry companies.
Proposed: Local governments are required to operate forestry agencies, which own and manage all forest land.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Government policy regarding a national park system.
Old value:: The government funds and maintains a network of national parks and/or marine protected areas.
Current: The government funds and maintains a network of national parks and/or marine protected areas.
Proposed: The government devolves park policy to local governments.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government-sponsored recycling programs.
Old value:: The government funds recycling facilities for public use.
Current: The government funds recycling facilities and enforces mandatory recycling for residents, commercial enterprise, and industry.
Proposed: Local governments decide about this.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on tree plantation.
Old value:: The government requires tree plantation at replacement level for all logging or clearance operations.
Current: The government requires tree plantation at replacement level for all logging or clearance operations.
Proposed: Local governments may set plantation policy.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets.
Old value:: The ownership of wild animals as pets is banned.
Current: The ownership of wild animals as pets is banned.
Proposed: This matter is left up to the local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 15:27:44, June 27, 2012 CET | From | Green Liberal Party Of Tukarali | To | Debating the The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment |
| Message | Agree with Article 1 as it reduces the commercialisation of public land but Articles 2,3,4,5 are simply a reversion to the issues highlighted in the debate for the Environmental Protection Act and will cause a return to the economic instability, inequality between regions and the illegal trade in animals that The Environmental Protection Act sought to alleviate. |
| Date | 16:42:53, June 27, 2012 CET | From |  Foster Care Survivors Party | To | Debating the The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment |
| Message | I am curious why the Tukarese Democratic Union wishes to push everything down to the local governments? |
| Date | 17:04:02, June 27, 2012 CET | From | União Democrática do Tukarali | To | Debating the The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment |
| Message | "The Tukarese Democratic Union was founded as a movement to counter the Fascist regime that used to have our country in its grip. As a consequence of the centralising and authoritarian nature of the the Fascist Party (nowadays the so-called Republican and Socialist Front), we have come to the conclusion that it is necessary to spread the powers of the state as far as possible and feasible among the regions instead of concentrating them on the national level." Cornelius Tang, President of the Council of the Tukarese Democratic Union |
| Date | 17:44:14, June 27, 2012 CET | From | Green Liberal Party Of Tukarali | To | Debating the The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment |
| Message | It seems rather obtuse and cynical that the TDU is willing to place the wider environment and its wildlife at risk for the purpose of countering the 'fascist regime'. We politicians as a whole must come to realise that no matter how immersive our political tirades and struggles may be, there are wider issues at stake. Whilst we agree that on some issues dissolving power to local governments may be beneficial and will support the TDU's policy in these instances, the GLPoT firmly believes the environment is not one such issue. |
| Date | 20:12:01, June 27, 2012 CET | From | Foster Care Survivors Party | To | Debating the The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment |
| Message | Agreed. Nature is nature no matter where it is :) |
| Date | 20:13:45, June 27, 2012 CET | From | União Democrática do Tukarali | To | Debating the The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment |
| Message | "We believe that devevolved policies still afford enough protection for the environment and that the detrimental effects on the wider environment and wildlife that the Green Liberals claim to be be caused such policies are far from proven. These provisions do not keep regional and local governments from sensible cooperation, but they remove the unhealthy authority vested in the national government. While we respect the stance of the GLPoT on the environment, we disagree that this area should be exempt from devolution. For us, the overriding political principle is safeguarding our democratic republic against the centralising and authoritarian powers that are still among us, and providing a clear alternative to the voters." Kim Sung Rhee, TDU parliamentary spokesperson on environmental affairs |
| Date | 12:20:45, June 28, 2012 CET | From | Green Liberal Party Of Tukarali | To | Debating the The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment |
| Message | There are a number of issues the GLPoT would like to raise with the TDU's spokesperson's statement: 1) Claims that devolution does not have detrimental effects on the environment are unfounded both on an Aristotelian logic basis and in respect to all scientific/social studies carried out on the issue. The simple truth is that if a company is less regulated in one region, enterprise will be more inclined to exploit that region. Where exploitation occurs more heavily in one area the wider economy and environment will suffer as a result of exploitation reaching unsustainable levels. 2) Even if the statement that 'devolved policies still afford ENOUGH protection" were true, the GLPoT believes that such a policy, founded on negative feedback whereby the minimum is done to conserve our environment, is not suitable for such an expansive issue. Moreover the GLPoT believes that everyone, no matter creed, colour OR geographic region, has the same obligation to proactively safe guard our environment and as such the issue needs to be dealt with on a centralised basis. 3) The argument for devolution in this instance is redundant in that although local governments MAY agree to work in "sensible cooperation", a centralised policy ensures that all local governments WILL work within standard regulations towards a common mutually assured goal, greatly increasing |
| Date | 12:21:21, June 28, 2012 CET | From | Green Liberal Party Of Tukarali | To | Debating the The Programme for Local Re-Empowerment |
| Message | ...the greater communities ability to do so rather than any single regional anomaly undermining the collective effort. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 54 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 71 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The Real-Life Equivalents Index is a valuable resource for finding out the in-game equivalents of real-life cultures, languages, religions, people and places: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6731 |
| Random quote: "The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated" - Mahatma Gandhi |