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: Foreign Relations
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progress Party
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: January 3841
Description[?]:
| One of the key jobs of a self governing nation is to control its borders. If we can control the quality and quantity of who comes in we can plan for school places, housing, health and infrastructure in general. Having unlimited numbers means services are overstretched and housing can't keep up with demand. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning immigration.
Old value:: Everyone is allowed to reside permanently in this nation.
Current: Everyone is allowed to reside permanently in this nation.
Proposed: Quotas are based on individual applicant's qualifications.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 15:25:00, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Luthori Imperial Party | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, While we are willing to support Article 1, Article 2 definitely has some problems. By passimg this extreme type of change, we would only be hurting our international image. The world would see us as unwelcoming to refugees. This would be a negative thing. Likewise, how would we want other countries to treat refugees from our country? Would we appreciate the country that turns them away because their reason for wanting safety is not "extreme" enough for their liking? The LIP are highly doubtfull that we would like that, much less the Luthorian People. I yield. |
| Date | 15:35:53, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Progress Party | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | Article 2 is not an extreme change to the system, it is the only alternative. Welcoming people for any reason can lead to corruption and lies. If people are genuinely in need of refuge they will be excepted into the system and will have integration aid provided. |
| Date | 15:50:21, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Progress Party | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | Mr Speaker, We will remove the refugee article and save that debate for another time. I yield |
| Date | 15:57:23, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Forward | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | Mr Speaker, We here at Arch can support this. I yield |
| Date | 17:53:58, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Hosian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Luthori has a history of being a refuge for Immigrants, and arguably that is what made this country great. Immigration allows a sharing of culture and prosperity, and this qualifications requirement limits those who can enter our country. I yield |
| Date | 17:59:07, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Choice | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | We're strongly in support of this bill, we would have also strongly supported the article 2 which was removed. |
| Date | 18:27:19, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Progress Party | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | Mr Speaker, In regards to the HSP's point, which really made no real statement what so ever. This system does not stop people coming in it simply controls the quality and quantity. Cultures would still enter and would be shared but the limitation is changed. |
| Date | 18:28:28, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Hosian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, But it would be people who this government deems as worthy, not all people. And that is why we are against it. I yield |
| Date | 18:56:25, May 03, 2015 CET | From | Choice | To | Debating the Foreign Relations |
| Message | Rather hypocritical of the HSP don't you think? You say the government should have the ability to only allow people into our country who we "deem worthy" yet you want to strongly promote religion, one religion which your party deems "worthy". And I remember in the religious schools act you were against me legalising all religions to set up schools due to not all religions being "valid", thus you were stating that the government should deem with religion is worthy. Not much difference between choosing which people are valid to which religion now is there? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 123 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 227 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: There is a phpBB forum dedicated to Particracy. Please click the Forum link in the top game menu. Additions to the game, suggestions and discussion is held there so get involved. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "The activist is not the man who says the river is dirty. The activist is the man who cleans up the river." - Ross Perot |