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: Legislation proposal - II
Details
Submitted by[?]: United People's Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill proposes the withdrawal from a treaty. It will require half of the legislature to vote in favor[?]. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: January 3543
Description[?]:
| Changes to Legislation |
Proposals
Article 1
Withdraw from the Declaration of Neutrality.
Article 2
Withdraw from the Beluzia Accord - 4th Edition.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on the nation's power grid.
Old value:: The national grid is fully owned by the state.
Current: The national grid is fully owned by the state.
Proposed: Each region owns and maintains its own power grid.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy in respect to highways.
Old value:: All highway projects are undertaken by contracted firms.
Current: There is a national highway system constructed and maintained by the national government, and local systems by local governments.
Proposed: There is a national highway system constructed and maintained by the national government, and local systems by local governments.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change Military stance on homosexuality.
Old value:: Open homosexuality is not tolerated in the military. The military has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Current: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Proposed: Homosexuality is allowed in the military.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards the use of land mines by the army.
Old value:: The use of land mines is allowed but restricted.
Current: The use of land mines is prohibited.
Proposed: The Government leaves this to the army to decide upon.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change The appointment of mayors.
Old value:: Local governments determine the method of appointment.
Current: Local governments determine the method of appointment.
Proposed: Citizens elect their mayor directly in a local election.
Article 8
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Current: There shall be no mandatory military or civilian national service.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Article 9
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on nuclear power.
Old value:: The government requires most energy to be generated by nuclear power.
Current: The government requires most energy to be generated by nuclear power.
Proposed: The government encourages nuclear power (subsidies, tax relief etc).
Article 10
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of nuclear weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in retaliation to any attack.
Current: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to nuclear weapons in retaliation to a nuclear, chemical or biological attack.
Article 11
Proposal[?] to change Government's position on paramilitaries.
Old value:: Paramilitaries are allowed as part of each political party.
Current: Paramilitaries are illegal and the recognized government may intervene freely to stop any possible activity.
Proposed: Paramilitaries are allowed but are heavily regulated by the government.
Article 12
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the post office
Old value:: There is a nationalised post office. Private post office agencies are allowed to exist, and the services provided by them are not regulated.
Current: There is a nationalised post office agency. Private post offices are allowed to exist but the services provided by them are regulated.
Proposed: There is a nationalised post office agency. Private post offices are allowed to exist but the services provided by them are regulated.
Article 13
Proposal[?] to change Funding of public transport (where applicable).
Old value:: Public transport is partially subsidised with the remainder "user-pays".
Current: Public transport is fully subsidised for people with low-income, with the remainder "user-pays".
Proposed: Local governments decide upon the funding policy.
Article 14
Proposal[?] to change Public works initiatives
Old value:: The government has no program for public works projects.
Current: The government contracts with private corporations to build public works.
Proposed: Public works projects are left to local governments.
Article 15
Proposal[?] to change Train Operating Companies (TOC).
Old value:: There is a single publicly owned TOC.
Current: There is a single publicly owned TOC.
Proposed: The State owns and operates a national TOC, alongside private TOCs.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:21:45, September 04, 2013 CET | From | Encarta Party | To | Debating the Legislation proposal - II |
| Message | We do not consent to Articles 3, 4, and 16. We believe that power is a necessity that should be afforded to it's citizens by their government and not in the hands of private business which seeks profits above all else. We also believe that it is the Government's responsibility to set up shelters across the nation for our citizens to retreat to if the need arises. We see it as a strong defensive requirement, much like a well-armed military. To that end, we agree with all but the aforementioned articles. |
| Date | 23:22:06, September 05, 2013 CET | From | United People's Party | To | Debating the Legislation proposal - II |
| Message | Thank you. Yes, we do realize that Civil Defence and Power are responsibilities of the Government, and important ones at that. Earlier defences on not considering them as governmental matters have been proved wrong after careful debate, and the articles has been removed. Existing laws in these regards are working good and serve the purpose well. Regarding, the Public works article, I must clarify that, presently, the Government undertakes no responsibility in public works! That means, all the relevant infrastructure, welfare, etc. fundings and programs, laws, including those in power/energy, education, infrastructure, health amongst many others which are constituents of public works are not put to practice or implemented without detail to public needs, and that explains the pathetic scale of development and apathy in some resource-rich states in our country even today. Public works are the Government's responsibility, more so the local government's, that can identify projects relevant and applicable to it's own requirements and demands, but with funding from the Central/Union Government. I ask of you to reconsider your position on this matter, before the bill is put to voting. |
| Date | 23:31:15, September 05, 2013 CET | From | Encarta Party | To | Debating the Legislation proposal - II |
| Message | Ah, you have misunderstood us. We fully support Article 14 and look forward to it's implementation. However, we must ask the question. Should we leave Public works up to local governments entirely, or should we contract with private companies. In support of the latter, we will find it will give the economy a much needed shot in the arm on the private side of things, as well as making our government seem business friendly, without the lax of any sort of regulations or taxes. I think we should consider both options as extremely viable routes. |
| Date | 00:11:08, September 06, 2013 CET | From | United People's Party | To | Debating the Legislation proposal - II |
| Message | That does seem to be a bright option, and our party was in favour of such an option too, but leaving it out to he privates entirely, as the option says, would mean future burden on the people in the form of inflated costs of project, lower employment guarantee in the projects, as well as say, tolls for highways/expressways, bridges and such other money-making mechanisms and that's where we'll need to enforce regulations on them and then that would result in they eventually backing out from such projects...Private participation wouldn't be without their eyes on how to make money in future out of these public projects, which thus have to be the government's responsibility...sort of an ethical responsibility that way! With the local Government, the idea was to ensure every state, city and further divisions have a say in what projects they want and how to implement them. Plus, that would relieve a huge burden off of the Central Government, which would have to only act as the funding source to the Local Government and a regulator of sorts. Wish there was a 'Local Government + Private participation with regulation" option! They sure have many other areas to conduct huge regulation-free businesses, even with some tax-perks! Some legislations to this regard are in the pipeline, by the way. So not to worry about our businessmen! |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes |
Total Seats: 46 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 53 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players should not role-play characters without the consent of the owner, and if they find they have role-played the character beyond what the owner intended, they should withdraw or amend the role-play appropriately. |
| Random quote: "Democrats couldn't care less if people in Indiana hate them. But if Europeans curl their lips, liberals can't look at themselves in the mirror." - Ann Coulter |