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: Public Energy Act
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: March 2167
Description[?]:
| This bill nationalises all power stations in Ikradon. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on energy generation.
Old value:: Private and public power stations exist side-by-side.
Current: All power stations are publicly owned.
Proposed: Small scale private electrical generation is permitted but most energy is generated by a government-owned company.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 08:52:55, December 14, 2005 CET | From |  Ikradonian Faith Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | We applaud the NDP's proposal and will support it. |
| Date | 10:43:49, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Neoretropostmodernist Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | We see little benefit from barring private entities from producing electricity. If the government doesn't want competition, then it is obvious that the government is not doing a good job of providing electricity in the first place. |
| Date | 15:06:54, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Ikradon Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | "We applaud the NDP's proposal and will support it." So do we. The energy sector is one of the most important in our economy and should be own by the State. We consider the control of the private sector in this matter (matter, is that right? Please tell me... lol) is harmfull to our citizens. |
| Date | 17:40:51, December 14, 2005 CET | From | National Conservative Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | We continue our seemingly solidary stance against the NDP and their misguided socialist principles. |
| Date | 21:21:33, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Classical Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | It is not misguided, the fact is energy is a near monopoly in most regions. Have you any idea the costs and risks of setting up an opposing station? If I had suggested this, it woudl be nationalist. |
| Date | 00:06:25, December 15, 2005 CET | From | Neoretropostmodernist Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | I believe there's another bill regulating prices. If a private company can provide quality service at the set price, then they shouldn't be forced out because of a paranoid government. |
| Date | 03:19:25, December 15, 2005 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | But we don't actually know the condition of the private power stations, and besides, according to my interpretation of the current situation, they are selling their power to a public company, which then transmits and distributes their power through the public grid. There aren't regulated prices; the government is setting them via the nationalised distribution company. Besides, there is a strong economic case for the public nature of power generation given that it's a merit good and crucial to the economy. |
| Date | 03:21:23, December 15, 2005 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | Ack, didn't finish my first point there - that it makes more sense to consolidate the whole shebang into the public company, while still having allowing the private sector to generate their own power for their operations or homeowners to cover their roofs in solar panels if they want. |
| Date | 12:32:36, December 16, 2005 CET | From | Neoretropostmodernist Party | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | We still believe there is merit in maintaining private power plants. Part of our philosophy is to keep the economy from becoming too dependent on market or government forces. Also, private power plants are quicker to adopt new ideas and technologies that may be delayed in implication by an extensive public company. |
| Date | 16:32:04, December 19, 2005 CET | From | Lyika ati Isọdọtun | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | After some lengthy debate, we've decided to oppose this measure. The FFP continues to favor the free functioning of the private sector where it can flourish without being detrimental. |
| Date | 09:21:26, January 05, 2006 CET | From | Underappreciated Party of Ikradon | To | Debating the Public Energy Act |
| Message | The UPI gives its support. This better protects consumers and the enviroment from corperate price gouging. ---Stephe Forest, UPI Environmental Advisor |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 317 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 204 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 78 |
| Random fact: "Jezvraljogadsrlji" means "Social" in the Jelbic languages. |
| Random quote: "An independent is someone who wants to take the politics out of politics." - Adlai Stevenson |