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: National Highways Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Socialist 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: November 3428
Description[?]:
Madam Speaker, as a result of increased infrastructure spending, a lot of projects are now underway to modernise our road sysytem. I fear that we are relying too much on private contractors which produce shoddy work, provide poor value-for-money for the public and treat their workers badly. Government agencies need the appropriate powers to carry out these important projects for themselves. Cadfael Maddocks MP (Leader of the Opposition) |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy in respect to highways.
Old value:: All highway projects are undertaken by contracted firms.
Current: A national highway infrastructure is constructed and maintained by the government.
Proposed: There is a national highway system constructed and maintained by the national government, and local systems by local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 21:20:27, January 17, 2013 CET | From | Grand National Party | To | Debating the National Highways Act |
Message | Madam Speaker, it goes without saying that we oppose this bill for ideological reasons, but we also fail to comprehend the Hon. Member's argument. If the state clearly defines the conditions upon which the respective contract with a private company shall be carried out, it is clear that said business will ensure in its own interest to strictly adhere to these conditions. Otherwise, it would violate the deal and lose its salary for conducting the highway project. Danielle Dayton MP Member for Elbian GNP Infrastructure Spokeswoman |
Date | 00:51:31, January 18, 2013 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the National Highways Act |
Message | Madam Speaker, the big private building companies dominate the market and are able to dictate agreements to their customers - even when they are dealing with the government. It would be much more efficient for highways projects to be carried out in-house by government agencies. Cadfael Maddocks MP (Leader of the Opposition) |
Date | 03:48:14, January 18, 2013 CET | From | Civic Democratic Party | To | Debating the National Highways Act |
Message | Madam Speaker, While we do not usually agree with the idea of nationalization, or purely governmental institutions, we do support this bill. Mass transportation is a matter of national security and public interest. We have no qualms with corporations, we just feel that the government should take an active rule in this matter. Maria Véliz de Tavira Chairman of Encrucijada Democrática |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||
yes |
Total Seats: 190 | ||||
no |
Total Seats: 102 | ||||
abstain | Total Seats: 59 |
Random fact: Make sure your nation casts its nominations in Particracy's very own Security Council elections! For more information, see http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=8453 |
Random quote: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." - Winston Churchill |