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: P.I. 4123 - Pet Policy/Neuclear Arms Ownership/Retirement Age Endringer
Details
Submitted by[?]: Grønn Parti
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: September 4123
Description[?]:
| *None* |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The policy with respect to nuclear weaponry.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to develop, produce and store nuclear arms.
Current: The nation shall never produce or store nuclear weaponry for military purposes. Research and development of the technology is permitted.
Proposed: The nation shall never produce or store nuclear weaponry for military purposes. Research and development of the technology is permitted.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The professional retirement age.
Old value:: 62
Current: 60
Proposed: 65
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets.
Old value:: This matter is left up to the local governments.
Current: The ownership of wild animals as pets is banned.
Proposed: Wild animals may be kept as pets; the owners of dangerous wild animals must take the necessary measures to ensure they can't escape.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:27:44, November 20, 2016 CET | From |  Nye Progressiv Bevegelse | To | Debating the P.I. 4123 - Pet Policy/Neuclear Arms Ownership/Retirement Age Endringer |
| Message | These ramshackle and chaotic articles are a direct affront to Kazulian democracy. There are better ways of protest than wasting the Stortinget's time with such drivel. To elaborate further on the so-called bill itself would only lend credence to these proposals and the cause of the delinquent Grønn Parti. Perhaps if the Grønn Parti spent more time assessing the needs of their constituents and addressing national problems in a more constructive manner than creating ridiculous legislation to point out perceived national flaws, if there is truly any point to this attempt at a bill, they would be taken more seriously and accorded more respect. We strongly suggest to the Grønn Parti that any further legislation they propose should have a clear purpose, have reasonably connected proposals, go through an extensive revisionary process both before and during debate, and finally be advanced to the voting process after a lengthy debate process. We shall abstain, and urge others to do the same. We do not consider this a bill and will not vote yea or nay to affirm the status of these proposals as a bill. We earnestly hope that this was an egregious error in the adminstrative wing of the Grønn Parti, perhaps through miscommunication on a tremendous scale and the melding of several proposed policy changes, although we are doubtful of this. Henrik Jensen Føderale Republikanske Parti Chairman |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 0 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 134 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 1 |
| Random fact: Large scale RP planning (such as wars, regional/continental conflicts, economic collapse, etc.) should be planned (as best as it can be) and should have consent of a majority of players involved. |
| Random quote: "If voting changed anything, they'd abolish it." - Ken Livingstone |