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: Infrastucture Reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: Moderate Beluzians
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 2182
Description[?]:
| Changes needed in our infrastructure laws. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Firefighting services.
Old value:: There is a national fire department, funded by the government.
Current: Fire prevention and management is left to the local governments.
Proposed: Fire prevention and management is left to the local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on nuclear power.
Old value:: The government does not take any position on 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 3
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: Public transport is fully subsidised by the government.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:11:26, February 05, 2006 CET | From | Moderate Beluzians | To | Debating the Infrastucture Reform |
| Message | An explanation for each proposal: 1) Local governments know their needs better than the central government. Local citizens should support this source. Each area maintains different conditions. 2) Despite some nay-saying from other parties, nuclear power provides a clean, renewable resource with minimum risk. Yes, the industry suffered failures in it's inception, but that occured because of human error and mismanagement. 3) This will reduce pollution and the nessacity of personal transport. If any object strongly, I may remove a proposal. If so, it will then become it's own bill. |
| Date | 05:37:24, February 05, 2006 CET | From | LiberalDemocraticFreedomTaxAndSpendParty | To | Debating the Infrastucture Reform |
| Message | 1) National fire departments are more effective a spreading their resources to fight forest fires, then are local fire departments. 2) Current nuclear technology is unsafe however were we to achieve something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_Fast_Reactor then I would support that type of nuclear power plants. 3)I could support this. |
| Date | 14:16:36, February 05, 2006 CET | From | People's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia | To | Debating the Infrastucture Reform |
| Message | No on all accounts. |
| Date | 23:06:51, February 05, 2006 CET | From | Partisans And Artisans League | To | Debating the Infrastucture Reform |
| Message | I would agree resident PPP wiseman. |
| Date | 23:56:33, February 05, 2006 CET | From | People's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia | To | Debating the Infrastucture Reform |
| Message | If Infrastructure and Transport minister Louise Roberts makes her case convincingly enough, I might be willing to support the first and third proposals. The second is completely contrary to the Peoples inflexably ecofascist stance. |
| Date | 00:03:21, February 07, 2006 CET | From | Neo-Marxist revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Infrastucture Reform |
| Message | I would agree with the third proposal but not the other two. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 14 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 86 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Submitting a bill without any proposals in it will not attract or detract voters. It will not raise your visibility or change your political position. |
| Random quote: "Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed there are many rewards, if you disgrace yourself, you can always write a book." - Ronald Reagan |