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: Infrastructure Revitalisation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Shuggoth Progressive 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: March 2178
Description[?]:
| This bill seeks to take the Central government out of the business of providing housing and energy development. The regions know better what their own housing needs are, and can contract with private companies (or not) as they see fit. As for energy development, the regions are also better suited to know what their exact needs are. They can take their own stands on nuclear power and renewable energies, rather than having these stands dictated to them from Sondavita. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on nuclear power.
Old value:: The government does not take any position on nuclear power.
Current: The government encourages nuclear power (subsidies, tax relief etc).
Proposed: The decision is left up to local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Renewable energy sources (eg. solar power, wind power).
Old value:: Government subsidies are provided for research and generation of energy through renewable sources.
Current: Government subsidies are provided for research and generation of energy through renewable sources.
Proposed: The decision on renewable energy sources is left up to local governments.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government policy regarding housing.
Old value:: The state contracts with private companies to provide public housing.
Current: Housing policy is to be determined by local governments.
Proposed: Housing policy is to be determined by local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:14:54, January 28, 2006 CET | From | Seosavists Republican party | To | Debating the Infrastructure Revitalisation Act |
| Message | against, I completely agree with our current position in all three cases. |
| Date | 03:53:37, January 29, 2006 CET | From | Luthori Green Party | To | Debating the Infrastructure Revitalisation Act |
| Message | I can't vote to change article two. |
| Date | 09:39:01, January 29, 2006 CET | From | Covenanters (IA) | To | Debating the Infrastructure Revitalisation Act |
| Message | Unusually I'm with the SRp on this one. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 130 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 517 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 103 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context. |
| Random quote: "He who is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god." - Aristotle |