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: Civil Defence Act, 3338
Details
Submitted by[?]: New 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: August 3339
Description[?]:
| A bill to: 1) Require public buildings to include shelters open to the public |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Civil defence is the government's policy on providing shelters to be used in the event of attacks on major cities, mainly nuclear attacks and bombing.
Old value:: The government builds and maintains a network of shelters across the nation.
Current: No new buildings may be constructed unless they feature provisions for civil defence.
Proposed: Every public building is required to feature provisions for civil defence and at least 50% of spaces must be allocated to private citizens.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:56:45, July 24, 2012 CET | From |  Zardio Federisma Partio | To | Debating the Civil Defence Act, 3338 |
| Message | There is nothing wrong with the current policy so why the change? There are no existential threats to the federation that require steps like this. |
| Date | 04:01:41, July 24, 2012 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Civil Defence Act, 3338 |
| Message | There was no requirement for extensive provisions - just reasonable steps to ensure that people don't get slaughtered as a result of every minor disaster. And we are again privatising, since most public buildings (as in buildings where the public have free access, so not necessarily government buildings) are not government-run and built. |
| Date | 05:14:48, July 24, 2012 CET | From | Zardio Federisma Partio | To | Debating the Civil Defence Act, 3338 |
| Message | Again, there is no need for this change. Our current system has worked well in times of peace and war. |
| Date | 05:23:24, July 24, 2012 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Civil Defence Act, 3338 |
| Message | Sure, it has worked. Is there any harm in trying to make to work better? |
| Date | 22:30:24, July 24, 2012 CET | From | Zardio Federisma Partio | To | Debating the Civil Defence Act, 3338 |
| Message | Yes because by tinkering with a system that already works you will make it work. Do not change for the sake of change. |
| Date | 08:46:54, July 25, 2012 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Civil Defence Act, 3338 |
| Message | We are changing for the sake of improvement, not the sake of change. (OOC: But it's already passed. Ha ha!) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |
| yes |
Total Seats: 386 | |
| no |
Total Seats: 364 | |
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players are expected to play the game independently and should not share their passwords or allow others to access their accounts. |
| Random quote: "My tenure will be controversial and it is, quite obviously, true that I am the most right-wing Prime Minister this country has seen in several decades.” - Margaret Woodhall, former Dranian politician |