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: Child Labour - no - let them play
Details
Submitted by[?]: Likaton Fascist Front
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: July 2172
Description[?]:
| The PSS sees the children of Likatonia as our future. We feel that children have a right to be children, and not just seen as a means to produce a commodity. Child Labour is exploits a group with almost no voice in society. Absalom ben Adamah sees it as something Likatonia should be ashamed of. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning child labour.
Old value:: Child labour is allowed, but with additional regulations to those of adult labourers.
Current: Child labour is forbidden.
Proposed: Child labour is forbidden.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:24:34, January 10, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | By the passage of this bill, a 14 year old could not have a paper route, a 16 year old could not stock shelves in a grocery store. We agree with the principle that children need to be children; but they also need to grow up a little at a time. That is the purpose of the additional regulations in place for child labor at the current time. |
| Date | 14:25:48, January 10, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | This is pure nonsense. Education is compulsory, therefore a child working when they should be at school is illegal, any business doing this would face criminal prosecution. Children having a paper round or a Saturday Job is not detrimental to anything, as long as we retain the current additional regulations that prevent children working for more than a certain number of hours a week, and restricitng where they can work. The leader of the CP is not ashamed that his children, via working a few hours a week, have learnt the value of money and of independence, this can only be good for them. |
| Date | 15:18:45, January 10, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | The AAS is torn. We can see both sides of this argument. Perhaps, it all comes down to what child 'labour' actually means? Is a paper-route child 'labour'.... or is 16 hours in the mill 'child labour'. |
| Date | 18:00:53, January 10, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | Child labour, is child work, annoyingly the term labour does conjure up an image of little majatran kids working down Al'Badaran mines, but that is not the image that should be projected at all. Lets look at the facts, education is compulsory, so no child misses out upon schooling, secondly additional regulations are provided compared to adult labour. If the original bill could be found, we would be able to verify any definitions that were added. However one automatically assumes that a childs working week cannot be longer than an adults, with schooling counting towards a childs working weekly hours. However, the CP basically assumes that labour is the same as employment, and we shall never see anything wrong with a child working several hours to make some money. |
| Date | 18:28:21, January 10, 2006 CET | From | JLP Liberation Militia | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | PSS - several interesting issues have been brought up here. Could you define what you mean by "child labor"? Would it include, as mentioned by the RLP and CP, paper routes? Would Jr. working after school at Daddy's store be included? |
| Date | 21:20:31, January 10, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | We would propose an inclusive forum of all parties to define exactly what is considered 'child labour', or indeed what defines a child. Our initial feeling would be that children under 10(?) are not permitted to work in any capacity, but there is certain flexibility in this. As the AAS has stated in another debate, our tax rates are very favourable to foreign companies, and we do not want to see Nikes.. sorry, er Likes (likatonian Nike type shoes) being made here by children in sweatshops and being paid a pittance. |
| Date | 22:03:51, January 10, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | I somehow doubt that that is the case, we are not a poor nation, and our children have to go to school, we do not feel that they would have the time to also have ten hour shifts in sweatshops. However we welcome forum to define the regulations fully, but we do not think child labour should be banned outright. |
| Date | 22:04:44, January 10, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | We currently have a general statement of this as proposed in the original bill: http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=34556 We could refine and quantify this in a referendum type bill, without eliminating it completly. |
| Date | 22:21:30, January 10, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | With many thanks to the RLP, for digging out the original legislation.... under the CURRENT scheme, our 'child labour' laws regulate a minimalistic (almost apprentice-like) system, perhaps. The controls seem reasonable, and the regulation seems sufficient to prevent much in the way of corruption of the 'ideal'. This in mind, the AAS sees little reason to vote to overturn the current legislation. Now - if as the PSS sketched out - Likatonian children were being compelled into basically slavery positions... the AAS would see a very different complexion on the issue. |
| Date | 13:14:31, January 12, 2006 CET | From | Right Wing Liberals Party | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | I support no severe manual work before the age of 15 or 16 except on farms because Country folk are stronger than city folk. |
| Date | 17:55:42, January 16, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the Child Labour - no - let them play |
| Message | We have no evidence of children currently being exploited in sweatshops, and we seek to keep it that way - beyond any chance of some unscrupulous capitaist finding a cheap source of labour to exploit. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 182 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 318 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: All role-play must respect the established cultural background in Culturally Protected nations. |
| Random quote: "And what is Aleppo?" - Gary Johnson |