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: Urgent Questions to the President Regarding Polarisation
Details
Submitted by[?]: Baltusian Democratic Green Party (BDGP)
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: February 4178
Description[?]:
| Events in Congress have recently been increasingly polarised, with tensions seemingly the highest since the end of the Civil War. This, I believe, reflects what's happening to the general public also. The PLCA wasn't able to cause this much division due to a co-operative centre, but comments have made me believe the right-leaning parties have in some way disregarded that idea for the present situation. I would be lying if I said that I wasn't fearful that people's safety could be at risk as they go to the ballot box in a few months time. Members of my party are worried that all ideologies could be targeted, particularly the democratic centre, which has recently been under unprecedented scrutiny and attack. So with these fears in mind, I ask the President these six urgent questions: 1) What plans have been put in place to stop violence before, during and after the election campaign? 2) Does the President agree that compromise is more important than ever, and should be a goal for all sides? 3) Should the 'Security Force Bill' pass, what safeguards will be put in place in order to prevent violent, extremist groups going under the guise of a paramilitary? 4) Are there any plans in place or to be put forward by the Government which seek to create unity and consolidation between left and right in the country? 5) Does the President agree that as the head of state and a figure of unity, he should not seek to deepen the divides or appear biased to a particular side, particularly regarding the Civil War? 6) In the Civil War, both sides committed atrocities and neither were right; there is no victory or righteousness in war. So comments such as 'The communist rebels were the ones who declared war in the first place, so they were asking for death' (http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=508374) are completely wrong. Can the President explain what he meant by that, whether he will apologise for saying it, and if he will stand by those claims? I hope that the President can quickly answer these questions, and I am sure all parties will take this into account. I welcome all other opposition parties to add their own questions they'd like to ask regarding this issue. Sophie Guillory, Minority Leader of the House |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:45:04, March 08, 2017 CET | From | Patriotic Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Urgent Questions to the President Regarding Polarisation |
| Message | Members of Congress, If I may be so bold as to address this House while we wait for the president... I head up a very broad centre-right to right wing party, with many different views and with around 20 million voters. It means there are going to be some bills proposed by my colleagues I agree with and some I am not so enamoured with. However, I can see only one bill that has been proposed by our party (by a backbencher) that has split congress and that is the Security Force Bill. To this end I have now got the party whips involved and we will change our vote on that. Congressman Darvos will not be happy but so be it. All other bills, while some parties may not like them, have received support from other parties, often across the caucus divide. For instance, the Citizens ID Bill and Foreign and Integration Aid Bill were endorsed by the Progressive Party; conversely, both my party and the Republicans have endorsed the BDGP's reform of the Democratic Workers' Councils. Other bills we have proposed were universally supported. For instance the Military Involvement in Policing Matters Bill was passed by all 700 representatives. I am sure our National Service Bill will also be accepted in a similar way when we put it to the vote following the next election. So while I agree polarisation is still common place I do not think it is spilling over excessively and is certainly not the constant right-left split that existed when the PLCA was operating. Some individuals may say some controversial things but generally speaking we find a way that does not stray too far from the middle ground. I would like to point out that proposing to reduce foreign aid to better suit our economic conditions is no more far right or racist than proposing to drop democratic workers' council subsidies is anti-communist or an endorsement of brutal capitalism. We should all respect differing opinions even if we do not agree with them. I hope for better relations with all parties after the election and to this end I would like to pose my own question to the President. At the start of this term my suggestion was for the government and centre left forces to work together to find a way forward. If you are re-elected will you look to bring more parties into the fold to work in government with the Right Alliance? Patricia Grayson Home Secretary and Patriotic Party Leader |
| Date | 18:23:50, March 08, 2017 CET | From | Baltusian International Democratic Party | To | Debating the Urgent Questions to the President Regarding Polarisation |
| Message | Good evening, I would like to thank the Minority Speaker for fielding these questions. It is very important that we debate and uphold our democratic values in Baltusia, and such questions are certainly an excellent form of upholding these values. To respond to the Minority Speakers questions. 1) Well, I would like to begin by saying I am delighted to hear of no terrorism, or serious violence during campaigning, I think all parties around the chamber ought to owe these police officers and specialists a great deal for their work in preventing incidents from occuring. We must continue in this positive manner during voting and after the elections, according to BAITI and other police forces I have received notice that some voters in areas such as Terrarroka may be at risk of attack on their way to the polls. That is why I am issuing an executive order to temporarily place police officers around polling booths on election day specifically. Also, I am issuing an executive order which will temporarily fund around 200 reserve police cadets to do this duty on election days. The main location where the policing shall be required is Terrarroka. Post-election, it is important that key government areas such as Villita are protected, and these police officers will be stationed at main tourist places and monuments in and around the capital. Also, riot police are being implemented into the force in the weeks after the election in Villita. Whilst many people may feel slightly intimidated with all of these police around on election day, I must urge every single member of the public to use their vote, because the police are their to keep you and your family safe from violence and terror. 2) Compromise, of course, is as important as ever. That is why the Republicans are willing to go beyond left-right divides to act in the interests of this nation. For example, in our last term we worked with 3 other left parties alongside the Patriots to deal with religious taxation in a fair and sensible manner. We worked with the BDGP and RAC against the Patriots and Progressives with regards to Foreign and Integration Aid. Also, we worked with 4 leftists parties, whilst the Patriots abstained on the Right to Assemble Act. We worked with the BDGP and RAC against the Patriots and Progressives on the issue of Citizens' ID. We are always going to be a centre-right party, that is who we are. But as the evidence of the last term reveals- We will work with anyone in the interests of Baltusia. I think that the goal of every party should be to keep to their agenda, and not lose their identity, but work to achieve flexibility in their goals, and aim for compromise- In the interests of Baltusia. 3) That bill did not pass and the party who proposed it- the Patriots have actually voted against it. It was 0-611 and thus I assume your question would thus be rendered irrelevant. 4) Look, we cannot force any party to vote one way or another, that would be completely unfair and in fact render the democratic process of this nation void. However, all I can do is encourage parties to work with anyone in the interests of Baltusia. I think that the goal of every party should be to keep to their agenda, and not lose their identity, but work to achieve flexibility in their goals, and aim for compromise- In the interests of Baltusia. The Republican party will continually encourage parties to aim for compromise and be flexible. 5) Minority Speaker, I will seek to unify. However to clarify regarding the civil war. It was a violent act of high treason by communist rebels . I will never change my view, particularly when 2 family members died in that war. I will remain biased and will never sympathise with communists rebels who sought to undermine this nation and it's democratic process. 6) I did say 'The communist rebels were the ones who declared war in the first place, so they were asking for death'. It is not completely wrong, the communists rebels declared war. If they hadn't of declared war on the government and Baltusia, then there wouldn't have been deaths on either side. I will not apologise for that statement. What I was saying was that when somebody declares war on a nation and her democratic process then there is going to be life lost. It was instigated by the rebels, and the rebels only. If the communists had really wanted to take power, then they should have respected the Terra-renowned democratic election system of Baltusia and voted in a communistic party in the first place, not instigated violence. With regards to the Home Secretaries question: 1) We are happy to work with the BDGP in government at the moment, however that is it for just now. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 654 | ||||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 46 |
| Random fact: By default the head of government is the ultimate authority within a national government. In general terms, heads of government are expected to consult with cabinet colleagues (including those from other parties) before making significant decisions but they remain responsible for government action. |
| Random quote: "To refuse political equality is to rob the ostracized of all self-respect." - Elizabeth Cady Stanton |